Life in a right wing world

[Ringtone]

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. . . . And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

You talk as one without the slightest clue about what natural law is, and the emboldened are all lies.

Empowered woman? Feminazis?! LOL!

Only fools don't fear the dangers of government.

Special treatment:

In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. --Winston​

You are delusional. The people don't determine the terms of citizenship. At best, they elect people that set some guidelines. But in the end it is civil servants and governmental entities that determine who gets in and who does not. Just today, Biden increased the number of foreign refugees allowed in. Did you have a say in that? No, no you did not. Do you vote on who gets a tourist Visa? How about any Visa? Where is this place that I can go to that will help me determine the "terms of citizenship"?
Qualify this meaningless drivel.

No problem. Immigration. The right waxes eloquently about the inability of government to do anything. Nope, the government is inept at almost everything they attempt to do. The "free market" is the vehicle of choice. Well, except for immigration. The fear of those people coming across the border, and of course it is the southern border that drives the fear, has driven the right into the arms of the government. Build us a wall the right says. Go ahead government, pick and choose your citizens. The antithesis of how this nation was founded. In fact, the founders would be absolutely horrified. It is that fear that initiates the cognitive dissonance of the right's position on immigration. Why can't the "free market" control that immigration. And in a sense, it already does far more than any government action. But fear, an illogical and unfounded fear, consumes the right to such a degree that they are willing to turn over control of who is actually a citizen of this nation, who can get in and who cannot, to the government. Comical if it weren't so serious.

The issue goes to the integrity of the people's national sovereignty. Just as any individual has the inherent right of free-association, so too does the body politic of any given country. Walk into my house without my consent and see what you get when you mindlessly scream free market! I'll beat your brains out or shoot you dead.

Turning it over to the government?! What are you talking about? Ours is a constitutional republic. The people, the citizens, not the government, ultimately determine the terms of citizenship, and when the government fails to enforce the people's will regarding those terms, it usurps their prerogative.

If it's not the citizens of the body politic who determine the terms of citizenship of any given country, then quite obviously it's an unchecked, renegade government doing so.

It's not the other way around, you braying jackass!

You are delusional. The people don't determine the terms of citizenship. At best, they elect people that set some guidelines. But in the end it is civil servants and governmental entities that determine who gets in and who does not. Just today, Biden increased the number of foreign refugees allowed in. Did you have a say in that? No, no you did not. Do you vote on who gets a tourist Visa? How about any Visa? Where is this place that I can go to that will help me determine the "terms of citizenship"?

You're delusional per your wont to incessantly confound matters. Collectively, constitution law, case law and statutory law determine the terms of citizenship. Constitutional and case law prescribe certain, fundamental requirements to citizenship, and prevailing statutory law (immigration law enacted by the people's representatives) prescribes additional terms regarding the acquisition of citizenship and residency. Visas are issued in accordance with that law. In theory, bureaucrats, lead by the State Department, enforce the law of the people.

I wasn't alive when the Refugee Act of 1980, which permits the President to set an annual cap on refugees, was passed. So, no, I didn't have a say in that.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Here's a peek into what it would be like if conservatives ruled the world...Second grade girl expelled from Christian school over girl crush, mom says

I'm a conservative and my world is pretty awesome. My daughter is/was bi and I couldn't have cared less. She also knows I am pretty conservative and she doesn't care. We certainly have our political disagreements but 10 minutes after the conversation is over it's water under the bridge. That's how human beings should be but we've come to this place where opinions equal enemies..
As to religion I have no time for that ORGANIZED SCAM but like my daughter I don't go out of my way to offend those who choose to be blinded by it.

If you seek to empower the government like lefties, you're my enemy.

Fuck off.

Learn to discern what you read

 

[Ringtone]

Fuck off.

Learn to discern what you read

Take is easy, sunshine, I didn't attack you. Take your own advice and discern what you read.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Fuck off.

Learn to discern what you read

Take is easy, sunshine, I didn't attack you. Take your own advice and discern what you read.

You quoted me did you not?

 

[Ringtone]

Fuck off.

Learn to discern what you read

Take is easy, sunshine, I didn't attack you. Take your own advice and discern what you read.

You quoted me did you not?

Yes, I said, alluding to the sentiment in your post, that if you seek to empower the government like leftists, you're my enemy. I was using you in the general, propositional sense. I should have said if one, I suppose, to be clear.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Tbere

Fuck off.

Learn to discern what you read

Take is easy, sunshine, I didn't attack you. Take your own advice and discern what you read.

You quoted me did you not?

Yes, I said, alluding to the sentiment in your post, that if you seek to empower the government like leftists, you're my enemy. I was using you in the general, propositional sense. I should have said if one, I suppose, to be clear.

The was NOTHING in my post that says I love government.

Someday you dumbfucks will stop seeking enemies and only see the ones that truly exist

 

[westwall]

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. . . . And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

You talk as one without the slightest clue about what natural law is, and the emboldened are all lies.

Empowered woman? Feminazis?! LOL!

Only fools don't fear the dangers of government.

Special treatment:

In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. --Winston​

You are delusional. The people don't determine the terms of citizenship. At best, they elect people that set some guidelines. But in the end it is civil servants and governmental entities that determine who gets in and who does not. Just today, Biden increased the number of foreign refugees allowed in. Did you have a say in that? No, no you did not. Do you vote on who gets a tourist Visa? How about any Visa? Where is this place that I can go to that will help me determine the "terms of citizenship"?
Qualify this meaningless drivel.

No problem. Immigration. The right waxes eloquently about the inability of government to do anything. Nope, the government is inept at almost everything they attempt to do. The "free market" is the vehicle of choice. Well, except for immigration. The fear of those people coming across the border, and of course it is the southern border that drives the fear, has driven the right into the arms of the government. Build us a wall the right says. Go ahead government, pick and choose your citizens. The antithesis of how this nation was founded. In fact, the founders would be absolutely horrified. It is that fear that initiates the cognitive dissonance of the right's position on immigration. Why can't the "free market" control that immigration. And in a sense, it already does far more than any government action. But fear, an illogical and unfounded fear, consumes the right to such a degree that they are willing to turn over control of who is actually a citizen of this nation, who can get in and who cannot, to the government. Comical if it weren't so serious.

The issue goes to the integrity of the people's national sovereignty. Just as any individual has the inherent right of free-association, so too does the body politic of any given country. Walk into my house without my consent and see what you get when you mindlessly scream free market! I'll beat your brains out or shoot you dead.

Turning it over to the government?! What are you talking about? Ours is a constitutional republic. The people, the citizens, not the government, ultimately determine the terms of citizenship, and when the government fails to enforce the people's will regarding those terms, it usurps their prerogative.

If it's not the citizens of the body politic who determine the terms of citizenship of any given country, then quite obviously it's an unchecked, renegade government doing so.

It's not the other way around, you braying jackass!

You are delusional. The people don't determine the terms of citizenship. At best, they elect people that set some guidelines. But in the end it is civil servants and governmental entities that determine who gets in and who does not. Just today, Biden increased the number of foreign refugees allowed in. Did you have a say in that? No, no you did not. Do you vote on who gets a tourist Visa? How about any Visa? Where is this place that I can go to that will help me determine the "terms of citizenship"?

Maybe in your third world shithole your rules apply. But not in these United States. We are governed not by people, but by a CONSTITUTION. It was written by people far smarter than any of us, you especially.

It is the document that governs what government can do. These fucking elitists are shitting all over that document. They are going to pay a price for their treason.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Why is everyone arguing with this idiot?

I'm a conservative and my life is nothing like the garbage he posted.

Fuck him. Stop responding

 

[Ringtone]

The was NOTHING in my post that says I love government.

Someday you dumbfucks will stop seeking enemies and only see the ones that truly exist

Yes, I know that, and there was nothing in my post that said you did.

Earlier you wrote:

That's how human beings should be but we've come to this place where opinions equal enemies.

Then I shared with you my OPINION about leftists relative to your sentiment in the above:

If you seek to empower the government like lefties, you're my enemy.

Then you snapped at me, telling me to fuck off.

I didn't respond in kind because I understood how one might have gotten the wrong impression. I told you to take it easy, I wasn't attacking you. I was not talking about you personally. My intent was to use the word you in the neutral, propositional sense. Hence, for the sake of clarity, I told you what I should have said: "If one seeks to empower the government like lefties, one is my enemy."

That's all.

But then you snap at me again . . . even after I clarified things!

Someday you dumbfucks will stop seeking enemies and only see the ones that truly exist.

Seeking enemies?! Do you routinely tell others to fuck off or call them dumbfucks over nothing?

Apology?

 

[Ringtone]

Why is everyone arguing with this idiot?

I'm a conservative and my life is nothing like the garbage he posted.

Fuck him. Stop responding

Hey, Grampa, I'm still waiting on that apology from you. When will it be forthcoming?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Why is everyone arguing with this idiot?

I'm a conservative and my life is nothing like the garbage he posted.

Fuck him. Stop responding

Hey, Grampa, I'm still waiting on that apology from you. When will it be forthcoming?

Let me make this clear.

FUCK OFF

 

[whitehall]

We are living life in a radical left wing world. It seems that the Bank of America wants the FBI to know the names of everyone who attended the Trump rally and it willingly furnished credit card receipts. Shades of the "Black List" days but now the Commies are in charge and republicans are the targets.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We are living life in a radical left wing world. It seems that the Bank of America wants the FBI to know the names of everyone who attended the Trump rally and it willingly furnished credit card receipts. Shades of the "Black List" days but now the Commies are in charge and republicans are the targets.

Not only do I see an enormous class-action lawsuit in the making, I also SHOULD see a class-action lawsuit in the making. Last time I checked, it is illegal for a financial institution to hand over information like that without a subpoena.

 

[whitehall]

Cops are fired for attending the rally. The FBI arrested a mother of 12 for possession of a bullhorn. Banks are informing on innocent people who attended the rally. Welcome the the new world order.

 

[Winston]

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.

I am going to post this statement,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

(B)So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.(/B)

Look, I am just going to put it to you straight up. This,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

Is just stupid. Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide? Like I said, stupid. If they are perverts they are coming in any damn way. They don't need that damn cover. And it wouldn't be cover. If a pervert goes into the restroom of the opposite sex and assaults someone, their ass is going to jail, they can scream transgender all the hell they want. Assault is illegal no matter what.

Furthermore, you have probably shared the bathroom with a transgender individual and you never even knew it. Are you in the habit of gawking at other people's sex organs when you go to a public restroom? If so, then perhaps you are the pervert. And considering you now have seemingly obsessed with the size of my organ, I think we might be on to something.

I mean you are so damn self-absorbed that you want to force transgender individuals to be uncomfortable to satisfy your own unfounded and illogical self-delusions. I mean are you really that comfortable with some butch looking girl coming in to the female restroom to check out potential sexual partners, because that is exactly what you are advocating. Transgender males, looking for female partners, is who you want to share a restroom with. Transgender females, who have no sexual desire for you whatsoever, is who you want to keep out. Hell, maybe to appease your ignorant and antiquated viewpoints we should have six different restrooms. The damn truth is that public restrooms divided by sex is a pretty recent thing. You would have had a hell of a time in ancient Greece or Rome.

 

[Ringtone]

Hell, maybe to appease your ignorant and antiquated viewpoints we should have six different restrooms. The damn truth is that public restrooms divided by sex is a pretty recent thing. You would have had a hell of a time in ancient Greece or Rome.

The damn truth is that the sexual depravity of paganism is a relic of antiquity rearing its ugly head again, while the sexual mores of Christianity are the zenith of civilization. It's all downhill from here on out with degenerates like you leading the way.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.

I am going to post this statement,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

(B)So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.(/B)

Look, I am just going to put it to you straight up. This,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

Is just stupid. Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide? Like I said, stupid. If they are perverts they are coming in any damn way. They don't need that damn cover. And it wouldn't be cover. If a pervert goes into the restroom of the opposite sex and assaults someone, their ass is going to jail, they can scream transgender all the hell they want. Assault is illegal no matter what.

Furthermore, you have probably shared the bathroom with a transgender individual and you never even knew it. Are you in the habit of gawking at other people's sex organs when you go to a public restroom? If so, then perhaps you are the pervert. And considering you now have seemingly obsessed with the size of my organ, I think we might be on to something.

I mean you are so damn self-absorbed that you want to force transgender individuals to be uncomfortable to satisfy your own unfounded and illogical self-delusions. I mean are you really that comfortable with some butch looking girl coming in to the female restroom to check out potential sexual partners, because that is exactly what you are advocating. Transgender males, looking for female partners, is who you want to share a restroom with. Transgender females, who have no sexual desire for you whatsoever, is who you want to keep out. Hell, maybe to appease your ignorant and antiquated viewpoints we should have six different restrooms. The damn truth is that public restrooms divided by sex is a pretty recent thing. You would have had a hell of a time in ancient Greece or Rome.

I just heard, "Oh, you silly bitch. I, who do not have to worry about sexual predators because I'm a male, know much better about the dangers to women than you, a woman, does."

THAT is what is "just stupid", asshole. Let's just break this down into the various straw men you set up so that you could avoid having to think about the the damage that your selfish pursuit of your agenda causes, shall we?

"Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide?"

It is frankly disgusting to me that I even have to explain these self-evident facts to you, because you're so utterly indifferent to anyone other than yourself. Sexual predators are opportunists. They DO, in fact, spend their time searching for any possible way to get access to their preferred victim group. Child molesters look for jobs and houses that put them near large numbers of children who are unsupervised. Rapists look for locations where women will be alone and vulnerable. So yes, if you set up a law that says biological men entering women's restrooms and locker rooms CAN'T be challenged or prevented from doing so if they claim to "identify as a woman", it is obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense that sexual predators are going to leap on that opportunity.

Transgender Wyoming woman convicted of sexually assaulting 10-year-old girl in bathroom

A transgender Wyoming woman was convicted Thursday of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl inside a bathroom.

www.foxnews.com

Man Tried To Film Girl In Target Dressing Room In Palatine

Police in northwest suburban Palatine were searching for a man who tried to use his cell phone to record video of a girl in a Target dressing room.

chicago.cbslocal.com

Man charged with putting camera in Target bathroom

Providence man faces video voyeurism charges out of Warwick and Lincoln.

www.wpri.com

Target urged to end transgender bathroom policy after 2nd man caught recording women undressing

The American Family Association is praising Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for urging Target to re-examine its controversial transgender bathroom policies after a second man was caught recording women undressing in changing rooms.

www.foxnews.com

Man seen reaching under stall with phone in Target dressing room in New Jersey

Shoppers in Brick, New Jersey are on edge after a man was seen taking pictures of women changing in the stall next to him in a unisex Target dressing room.

abc7ny.com

I'm amused by your theory of, "The perverts are coming anyway, so why do we need to make rules against them doing it?" That's the equivalent of "Why have laws against murder, because people are going to kill each other anyway?" Here's the thing, Chuckles. The idea is to make public restrooms, locker rooms, etc. HARDER places for them to get victims, so that they - being opportunists, as I had to explain to you before - will give it up and go find an easier target. And the problem with your, "If they commit a sexual assault, then you just prosecute them and problem solved!!!" scenario is that, as the potential victim, I WOULD LIKE TO ARRANGE IT SO THE SEXUAL ASSAULT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE. Because duuuuhhh, Mensa Boy.

Furthermore, what the fuck does, "Well, someone probably already violated your privacy without your permission" have to do with anything? Would you tell your wife or your daughter, "Well, you've already been raped once, so why does it matter if another man rapes you, too?" What the fuck are you even talking about? The whole point here is I'm protesting that very violation of my personal sovereignty and control over my body, you fucknut!

You are absolutely, 100% fucking right that I am "self-absorbed" enough to want a miniscule percentage of mentally ill men to be uncomfortable rather than A) surrender control over my body to the state and misogynistic fucktards like you, and B) put myself at greater risk of sexual assault. If it's okay for THEM to be so self-absorbed as to say, "I don't care what effect it has on anyone else, I want validation of my delusion!!!" then I have no problem asserting my own self-interest in opposition. And I'm certainly not going to be shamed into surrendering my privacy and safety by the likes of YOU.

I'm not even responding to the rest of this point-by-point, because all I really need to say is that it's not for YOU to lecture me on who I do and don't want to share a restroom with, because IT'S NOT YOUR DECISION TO MAKE. It's not your body. It's not your privacy. It's not your safety. Even knowing what an anti-woman hunk of insecure, chauvinistic garbage you are, I am appalled at the idea that I even have to address such breathtaking arrogance. Save your mansplaining explanations for subjects that are even remotely your business; my life is not one of those subjects.

 

[Winston]

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.

I am going to post this statement,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

(B)So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.(/B)

Look, I am just going to put it to you straight up. This,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

Is just stupid. Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide? Like I said, stupid. If they are perverts they are coming in any damn way. They don't need that damn cover. And it wouldn't be cover. If a pervert goes into the restroom of the opposite sex and assaults someone, their ass is going to jail, they can scream transgender all the hell they want. Assault is illegal no matter what.

Furthermore, you have probably shared the bathroom with a transgender individual and you never even knew it. Are you in the habit of gawking at other people's sex organs when you go to a public restroom? If so, then perhaps you are the pervert. And considering you now have seemingly obsessed with the size of my organ, I think we might be on to something.

I mean you are so damn self-absorbed that you want to force transgender individuals to be uncomfortable to satisfy your own unfounded and illogical self-delusions. I mean are you really that comfortable with some butch looking girl coming in to the female restroom to check out potential sexual partners, because that is exactly what you are advocating. Transgender males, looking for female partners, is who you want to share a restroom with. Transgender females, who have no sexual desire for you whatsoever, is who you want to keep out. Hell, maybe to appease your ignorant and antiquated viewpoints we should have six different restrooms. The damn truth is that public restrooms divided by sex is a pretty recent thing. You would have had a hell of a time in ancient Greece or Rome.

I just heard, "Oh, you silly bitch. I, who do not have to worry about sexual predators because I'm a male, know much better about the dangers to women than you, a woman, does."

THAT is what is "just stupid", asshole. Let's just break this down into the various straw men you set up so that you could avoid having to think about the the damage that your selfish pursuit of your agenda causes, shall we?

"Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide?"

It is frankly disgusting to me that I even have to explain these self-evident facts to you, because you're so utterly indifferent to anyone other than yourself. Sexual predators are opportunists. They DO, in fact, spend their time searching for any possible way to get access to their preferred victim group. Child molesters look for jobs and houses that put them near large numbers of children who are unsupervised. Rapists look for locations where women will be alone and vulnerable. So yes, if you set up a law that says biological men entering women's restrooms and locker rooms CAN'T be challenged or prevented from doing so if they claim to "identify as a woman", it is obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense that sexual predators are going to leap on that opportunity.

Transgender Wyoming woman convicted of sexually assaulting 10-year-old girl in bathroom

A transgender Wyoming woman was convicted Thursday of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl inside a bathroom.

www.foxnews.com

Man Tried To Film Girl In Target Dressing Room In Palatine

Police in northwest suburban Palatine were searching for a man who tried to use his cell phone to record video of a girl in a Target dressing room.

chicago.cbslocal.com

Man charged with putting camera in Target bathroom

Providence man faces video voyeurism charges out of Warwick and Lincoln.

www.wpri.com

Target urged to end transgender bathroom policy after 2nd man caught recording women undressing

The American Family Association is praising Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for urging Target to re-examine its controversial transgender bathroom policies after a second man was caught recording women undressing in changing rooms.

www.foxnews.com

Man seen reaching under stall with phone in Target dressing room in New Jersey

Shoppers in Brick, New Jersey are on edge after a man was seen taking pictures of women changing in the stall next to him in a unisex Target dressing room.

abc7ny.com

I'm amused by your theory of, "The perverts are coming anyway, so why do we need to make rules against them doing it?" That's the equivalent of "Why have laws against murder, because people are going to kill each other anyway?" Here's the thing, Chuckles. The idea is to make public restrooms, locker rooms, etc. HARDER places for them to get victims, so that they - being opportunists, as I had to explain to you before - will give it up and go find an easier target. And the problem with your, "If they commit a sexual assault, then you just prosecute them and problem solved!!!" scenario is that, as the potential victim, I WOULD LIKE TO ARRANGE IT SO THE SEXUAL ASSAULT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE. Because duuuuhhh, Mensa Boy.

Furthermore, what the fuck does, "Well, someone probably already violated your privacy without your permission" have to do with anything? Would you tell your wife or your daughter, "Well, you've already been raped once, so why does it matter if another man rapes you, too?" What the fuck are you even talking about? The whole point here is I'm protesting that very violation of my personal sovereignty and control over my body, you fucknut!

You are absolutely, 100% fucking right that I am "self-absorbed" enough to want a miniscule percentage of mentally ill men to be uncomfortable rather than A) surrender control over my body to the state and misogynistic fucktards like you, and B) put myself at greater risk of sexual assault. If it's okay for THEM to be so self-absorbed as to say, "I don't care what effect it has on anyone else, I want validation of my delusion!!!" then I have no problem asserting my own self-interest in opposition. And I'm certainly not going to be shamed into surrendering my privacy and safety by the likes of YOU.

I'm not even responding to the rest of this point-by-point, because all I really need to say is that it's not for YOU to lecture me on who I do and don't want to share a restroom with, because IT'S NOT YOUR DECISION TO MAKE. It's not your body. It's not your privacy. It's not your safety. Even knowing what an anti-woman hunk of insecure, chauvinistic garbage you are, I am appalled at the idea that I even have to address such breathtaking arrogance. Save your mansplaining explanations for subjects that are even remotely your business; my life is not one of those subjects.

Project much? I mean talk about indifferent to anyone other than yourself. Lady, of course that is using the word generously, you take the cake. I mean there is you. Who has this huge fear, that by allowing individuals to use the restroom of the sex they identify with, you are somehow going to "lose control of your body". Talk about hyperbole. Hell, I don't know how long you spent searching for examples but none of your examples would have been prevented by forbidding transgenders from using the restroom of the sex they identify with. One of the examples happened in a private residence, two of them happened in "family restrooms", which are by definition unisex. And most of the rest happened in dressing rooms at stores, which are for the most part, not gender specific.

But anyways, we got your self-absorbed nasty ass on one side, who has this fear, and maybe you do. But I think it is all a bunch of horseshit and you are just homophobic or something. Because if you are really that worried I got some advice. Stay out of public restrooms, problem solved. And before you spout off about that consider this, 59% of transgender individuals AVOID PUBLIC RESTROOMS. On the other side we have a transgender female, probably wearing a dress, heels, and make-up, being forced to go to the men's restroom. I mean can you pull your head out of your ass long enough to just imagine what that be like for HER? Not to mention what it is like for the men that might happen to be in there. But all that discomfort is worth it to satisfy your homophobic unreasonable, illogical, hyperbolic fear. Like I said, talking about caring about no one but yourself. Yeah, make America great again, by creating a society of self-absorbed asshats like you.

I mean have you ever went to the restroom with your ten year old son and encountered a transgender female? Or better yet, do you really want to waltz into a restroom with your ten year old daughter and find some boot wearing, man dressing, hormone taking transgender male in there with a nice beard. I mean you are absolutely ignorant, blind with hate for people that are not just like you. Because all the scenarios I have laid out to you are about A THOUSAND TIMES more likely to happen than the bullshit fear of yours.

Living in society comes with the responsibility to empathize with other people. It also means making choices, protecting the rights of minorities, and minimizing harm. The policy you are against minimizes harm but you are too damn ignorant to see it.

 

[Ringtone]

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.

I am going to post this statement,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

What the hell is that rant all about? I mean you are absolutely stupid. I equated your unfounded fear of a man in a woman's restroom to the boogie man under the bed of a child. Do you tell the child they are right and have them come sleep in your bed? Well yeah, your lazy ass probably does. I told you that unfounded fear was the reason the ERA failed to pass, and yet you cling on to it like a clutch of pearls and spout off about women's rights. Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you?

And my wife stays home because she wants to. She has a title around here, "Boss". She runs the household, manages the finances, plans the vacations, and I do as I am told. The exact opposite of the Holy Roller household where the man is king and the woman is supposed to be a dutiful servant to her husband. I would not have anything to do with a woman with that little self-esteem.

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was defeated because common sense prevailed against the attempt to foist the feminazi empowerment of the state in violation of the imperatives of natural law, including the familial rights of the people, and biological realities.

Do you support equal pay provisions for women? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't either. Do you support a woman's right to control her body? Your party doesn't, I bet you don't. Republicans opposed the Violence Against Women Act, did you? --Winston​

Behold the doublespeak of statist bootlicks.

. . . a dutiful servant to her husband. --Winston​

​

That's helpmate to you, heathen.

​

I do as I am told. --Winston​

​

Sissy.

Natural law, familial rights, biological realities--all code words signaling ignorance and excuses. I don't understand how a man can call themselves a man if they have a fear of empowered women. Come to think about it, fear is the driving force behind almost all the positions of the right. Fear of people of color, fear of foreigners, fear of poor people, fear of vaccines, fear of the government. In fact, the only time the right is willing to accept government intervention is when they are afraid of something. And fear is nothing more than a sign of weakness and insecurity. No wonder you guys want to subjugate women, you sure as hell are not going to attract them with weakness and insecurity.

That is absolutely hilarious, coming from the most misogynistic prick I've met in years. You've made it clear that the only "empowerment" you want women to have is to happily go along with whatever you've decided they should think is best for them. It's painfully obvious to everyone by your hostility to a woman daring to hold an opinion you didn't authorize that YOU fear women who are truly empowered enough to think for themselves.

You can make accusations about others "subjugating women" when YOU aren't advocating policies to turn us into government property. Or even when you can manage to stop lecturing women long enough to listen to them.

You're a woman-hating bastard, Winston, and you're a bad person. You are none of the things you just pompously proclaimed yourself, and you are all the things you outrageously presumed to accuse others of being. You make women's lives worse. You are everything we have fought against for over a century. Some woman should kick you in your balls . . . if she can find them.

Freaking hilarious, as if you actually do think for yourself. You show me one damn example of a transgender female in a woman's restroom assaulting other women. Show me one or STFU. If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough, research the whole man in a woman's restroom scare, it was initiated by none other than Phyllis Schlafly. It was part of the STOP ERA movement, STOP standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges. Top of the list, women having separate bathrooms. Foolish.

Furthermore, I have never told you that you don't have the right to be a complete idiot. I have merely tried to show you that there is no damn boogieman under the bed. Your argument against transgender people going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with is unfounded and illogical. But if you want to be stupid, be stupid. Same for the sports argument. As I have mentioned in this thread, almost 200 transgender females currently participate in NCAA sports with almost no drama. Thankfully, the younger generation is much more receptive to diversity than your tired ass, old, soon to be gone, generation. And those transgender female athletes are required to go through a full year of testosterone reduction therapy before they can even participate. Then they are subject to testing with a maximum testosterone level somewhere close to one fifth that of a normal male. No perv is going to go through all that just to notch a win against women in some sporting competition. Your position on both issues is one of sheer ignorance and your continued howls only conflagrate that ignorance.

More misogyny. May I ask what gave you the idea that YOU get to set the parameters for whether or not I can feel concerned for my safety and my rights? What is it about having a penis - and a very tiny one, judging by how threatened you are by women who dare to disagree with you - that makes you think you get to declare, "Well, if women aren't being assaulted specifically by transgenders, then they don't get to feel unsafe and they have to be okay with whatever I decide is right for their bodies"? You might as well have a flashing sign over your head that reads, "I don't listen to what women say, because they might be smarter than me."

Try to think past your testosterone fog and actually hear me, boy.

1) It does not have to be the mental patients stuffing their dicks into panties assaulting women for your pandering to their fantasies to endanger us. Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims. If your substandard brain stem can't figure that out, then it is only because you yourself - selfish Cro-Mag that you are - have never had to think in terms of possibly being victimized, the way women routinely do. Or maybe it's because you're such a woman-hater than you identify with the predators.

2) I don't have to prove jack shit to you in order to "earn" the right to demand control over my privacy and my body and who does and does not get to be present around me in private areas. My body does not belong to you, and it does not belong to the government, and it is immoral and wrong for either of you to declare that you get to decide who I should and should not undress in front of on the basis of YOUR worldview.

(B)So . . . do you want to try that, "Sit down and shut up, you stupid broad, while I tell you what you really want and what's best for you" routine again? It's doing a marvelous job of making my case for me.(/B)

Look, I am just going to put it to you straight up. This,

Laws and rules allowing biological males to enter private female spaces like restrooms and locker rooms simply by declaring they "identify as female" will open the door to predators using it as a dodge to get close to their victims.

Is just stupid. Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide? Like I said, stupid. If they are perverts they are coming in any damn way. They don't need that damn cover. And it wouldn't be cover. If a pervert goes into the restroom of the opposite sex and assaults someone, their ass is going to jail, they can scream transgender all the hell they want. Assault is illegal no matter what.

Furthermore, you have probably shared the bathroom with a transgender individual and you never even knew it. Are you in the habit of gawking at other people's sex organs when you go to a public restroom? If so, then perhaps you are the pervert. And considering you now have seemingly obsessed with the size of my organ, I think we might be on to something.

I mean you are so damn self-absorbed that you want to force transgender individuals to be uncomfortable to satisfy your own unfounded and illogical self-delusions. I mean are you really that comfortable with some butch looking girl coming in to the female restroom to check out potential sexual partners, because that is exactly what you are advocating. Transgender males, looking for female partners, is who you want to share a restroom with. Transgender females, who have no sexual desire for you whatsoever, is who you want to keep out. Hell, maybe to appease your ignorant and antiquated viewpoints we should have six different restrooms. The damn truth is that public restrooms divided by sex is a pretty recent thing. You would have had a hell of a time in ancient Greece or Rome.

I just heard, "Oh, you silly bitch. I, who do not have to worry about sexual predators because I'm a male, know much better about the dangers to women than you, a woman, does."

THAT is what is "just stupid", asshole. Let's just break this down into the various straw men you set up so that you could avoid having to think about the the damage that your selfish pursuit of your agenda causes, shall we?

"Do you really think all the perverts are sitting at home choppin at the bit, waiting for the opportunity that allowing transgender individual access to the restroom of their choice is going to provide?"

It is frankly disgusting to me that I even have to explain these self-evident facts to you, because you're so utterly indifferent to anyone other than yourself. Sexual predators are opportunists. They DO, in fact, spend their time searching for any possible way to get access to their preferred victim group. Child molesters look for jobs and houses that put them near large numbers of children who are unsupervised. Rapists look for locations where women will be alone and vulnerable. So yes, if you set up a law that says biological men entering women's restrooms and locker rooms CAN'T be challenged or prevented from doing so if they claim to "identify as a woman", it is obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense that sexual predators are going to leap on that opportunity.

Transgender Wyoming woman convicted of sexually assaulting 10-year-old girl in bathroom

A transgender Wyoming woman was convicted Thursday of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl inside a bathroom.

www.foxnews.com

Man Tried To Film Girl In Target Dressing Room In Palatine

Police in northwest suburban Palatine were searching for a man who tried to use his cell phone to record video of a girl in a Target dressing room.

chicago.cbslocal.com

Man charged with putting camera in Target bathroom

Providence man faces video voyeurism charges out of Warwick and Lincoln.

www.wpri.com

Target urged to end transgender bathroom policy after 2nd man caught recording women undressing

The American Family Association is praising Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for urging Target to re-examine its controversial transgender bathroom policies after a second man was caught recording women undressing in changing rooms.

www.foxnews.com

Man seen reaching under stall with phone in Target dressing room in New Jersey

Shoppers in Brick, New Jersey are on edge after a man was seen taking pictures of women changing in the stall next to him in a unisex Target dressing room.

abc7ny.com

I'm amused by your theory of, "The perverts are coming anyway, so why do we need to make rules against them doing it?" That's the equivalent of "Why have laws against murder, because people are going to kill each other anyway?" Here's the thing, Chuckles. The idea is to make public restrooms, locker rooms, etc. HARDER places for them to get victims, so that they - being opportunists, as I had to explain to you before - will give it up and go find an easier target. And the problem with your, "If they commit a sexual assault, then you just prosecute them and problem solved!!!" scenario is that, as the potential victim, I WOULD LIKE TO ARRANGE IT SO THE SEXUAL ASSAULT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE. Because duuuuhhh, Mensa Boy.

Furthermore, what the fuck does, "Well, someone probably already violated your privacy without your permission" have to do with anything? Would you tell your wife or your daughter, "Well, you've already been raped once, so why does it matter if another man rapes you, too?" What the fuck are you even talking about? The whole point here is I'm protesting that very violation of my personal sovereignty and control over my body, you fucknut!

You are absolutely, 100% fucking right that I am "self-absorbed" enough to want a miniscule percentage of mentally ill men to be uncomfortable rather than A) surrender control over my body to the state and misogynistic fucktards like you, and B) put myself at greater risk of sexual assault. If it's okay for THEM to be so self-absorbed as to say, "I don't care what effect it has on anyone else, I want validation of my delusion!!!" then I have no problem asserting my own self-interest in opposition. And I'm certainly not going to be shamed into surrendering my privacy and safety by the likes of YOU.

I'm not even responding to the rest of this point-by-point, because all I really need to say is that it's not for YOU to lecture me on who I do and don't want to share a restroom with, because IT'S NOT YOUR DECISION TO MAKE. It's not your body. It's not your privacy. It's not your safety. Even knowing what an anti-woman hunk of insecure, chauvinistic garbage you are, I am appalled at the idea that I even have to address such breathtaking arrogance. Save your mansplaining explanations for subjects that are even remotely your business; my life is not one of those subjects.

Project much? I mean talk about indifferent to anyone other than yourself. Lady, of course that is using the word generously, you take the cake. I mean there is you. Who has this huge fear, that by allowing individuals to use the restroom of the sex they identify with, you are somehow going to "lose control of your body". Talk about hyperbole. Hell, I don't know how long you spent searching for examples but none of your examples would have been prevented by forbidding transgenders from using the restroom of the sex they identify with. One of the examples happened in a private residence, two of them happened in "family restrooms", which are by definition unisex. And most of the rest happened in dressing rooms at stores, which are for the most part, not gender specific.

But anyways, we got your self-absorbed nasty ass on one side, who has this fear, and maybe you do. But I think it is all a bunch of horseshit and you are just homophobic or something. Because if you are really that worried I got some advice. Stay out of public restrooms, problem solved. And before you spout off about that consider this, 59% of transgender individuals AVOID PUBLIC RESTROOMS. On the other side we have a transgender female, probably wearing a dress, heels, and make-up, being forced to go to the men's restroom. I mean can you pull your head out of your ass long enough to just imagine what that be like for HER? Not to mention what it is like for the men that might happen to be in there. But all that discomfort is worth it to satisfy your homophobic unreasonable, illogical, hyperbolic fear. Like I said, talking about caring about no one but yourself. Yeah, make America great again, by creating a society of self-absorbed asshats like you.

I mean have you ever went to the restroom with your ten year old son and encountered a transgender female? Or better yet, do you really want to waltz into a restroom with your ten year old daughter and find some boot wearing, man dressing, hormone taking transgender male in there with a nice beard. I mean you are absolutely ignorant, blind with hate for people that are not just like you. Because all the scenarios I have laid out to you are about A THOUSAND TIMES more likely to happen than the bullshit fear of yours.

Living in society comes with the responsibility to empathize with other people. It also means making choices, protecting the rights of minorities, and minimizing harm. The policy you are against minimizes harm but you are too damn ignorant to see it.

Let us go then, you and me,
And stroll beneath a cloudy sea
As evening spreads across its face like a toothless grin.
Let us go a-meandering down narrow-minded suburban lanes,
Silky slick with sullen rains
And hemmed in by redundant four-bedroom stalls and grated sewage drains;
Past the immaculate parks and the quaint, steepled churches,

the lofty perches,​

Where the vagabond Riffraff lurches in the pristine shadows:
A restless Crowd that chases dreams of easy grace and meadows,
And sings a melancholy hymn, a petulant brew, that lingers at your nervebone.