Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It is the new religion of the 21st century.
They have officially became what they hate.
They hated religious people wearing religious symbols. Hated religious people trying to even talk about their religion in their presence. They said all religious people are self righteous and intolerant. They said religious people want to punish others for not being religious etc. etc.
Well... that is EXACTLY who they became.
They wear all manner of symbols of their religion.
They are preaching to everyone about their religion.
They are self righteous in their belief they are more enlightened and better people than "non believers".
They not only want to punish all non believers but want to, in essence, ban them from society completely.
They are wholly intolerant of everyone else. And are willing to commit violence on others to shout them down and keep them from even speaking.
They became what that hated.
It's a great way for kids to get attention. When I first started teaching high school in 2000, it was common for girls to say that they were bi to get attention from a boy. It worked very well for them. Evidently a 7 becomes a 9 1/2 if she might make out with a girl in front of a teenage boy. Some boys tried to play the I'm bi card, but it didn't work the same at all.
Now, they like to say they are trans, because they become the heroes of their woke teachers.
But it isn't just the kids. There was an article in The Atlantic, which has become a huge cheerleader for the transgender industry, that said that kids who are unhappy with their bodies, or who act out, might be trans and not realize it. One of our counselors said that about a behavior student I work with. It was absurd, he shows absolutely no leanings in that direction.
I have No answers, except Hate never helps a situation.
This new fad is also clear proof people aren't 'born that way' and are just being indoctrinated, is all. Same way the 'libertarians' and left wing dopers kept claiming legalization would make dope safer and take the criminals out of it. It's all just a pack of self-serving lies and bullshit.
By the age of 3 you have said when you referred to a little boy as a she.
It used to be called "sissy training" back in the day.This new fad is also clear proof people aren't 'born that way' and are just being indoctrinated, is all. Same way the 'libertarians' and left wing dopers kept claiming legalization would make dope safer and take the criminals out of it. It's all just a pack of self-serving lies and bullshit.
It used to be called "sissy training" back in the day.
Now it is quite the fad. Refer to a three year old boy as a girl, AFFIRM that they are a girl and you are off and running.
It is not proof of any such thing fool! There have always been trans people. They are just more visible now. They are out and if that makes you crazy it's too damned bad. I have repeatedly posted evidence of a biological basis for being trans but apparently you're learning disabled.This new fad is also clear proof people aren't 'born that way' and are just being indoctrinated, is all. Same way the 'libertarians' and left wing dopers kept claiming legalization would make dope safer and take the criminals out of it. It's all just a pack of self-serving lies and bullshit.
Since you have declared a three year old to be female, then it follows to that this "gender affirming care" (a diabolic Orwellian construct if I ever heard of one) would then start at 3.It is not proof of any such thing fool! There have always been trans people. They are just more visible now. They are out and if that makes you crazy it's too damned bad. I have repeatedly posted evidence of a biological basis for being trans but apparently you're learning disabled.
I will grant you that some kids are influenced by the proliferation of trans culture and do either pretend or convince themselves that they are trans. Some are just rebelious. So what, they will get over it and in the meantime medical/ mental health will know who they are befor any gender affirming medical care isundertaken. But there is no excuse for denying care to those who need it
I said that they are awar [sic] of gender and sometimes feel that they are not the gender that was assigned to them.
The only actual blood occurs when you carve up children to change their appearance.Your willful ignorance and dishonesty is profoundly shocking. I declared no such thing. I said that they are awar of gender and sometimes feel that they are not the gender that was assigned to them. From that point, there is a long road ahead befor any gender affirming care is innitiated. At 3, the only thing that needs to be done is to support them while the socialy explore their gendr identity and allow them to find their own way. But they must not be rejected, or riddiculed or told to just get over it either, which I believe is what your response would be. I sure hope that you will never be in a position to do so. You would have blood on your hands.
Agreed.Activist studies?Your guardian article is from 2004 and does not link to the conclusions found by the ARIF nor can any research on gender dysphoria be found on their website. The other link a Medicare website.
www.thepublicdiscourse.com
journals.plos.org
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
In cases like you describe, those like Milo were never gay. Those like Chirlene were never lesbian. Someone in their lives when they were young gave them pleasure and convinced them of their homosexuality. They were given friends, a support structure. Then if they showed the slightest inclination of normalcy they are told that they will be alone. Their friends will leave. Their support will crumble. They become resigned and take joy in the life resignation gives them.I have a suggestion:
To include in these studies the responses in brain patterns of people BEFORE and AFTER completing spiritual healing to change from LGBT to heterosexual/cisgender.
For example, people like Milo who identified as gay but later decided that wasn't natural and changed their minds about their orientation, or Chirlene DeBlasio who identified as Lesbian but later married her current husband as "the love of her life."
Why not study all cases, instead of trying to make them all fit under one theory?
What if some cases are natural, others unnatural, some people being able to change, while others cannot?
The "science"You're not interested in objective facts and reasoned arguments. Or you simply don't understand the science?
Another former member on USMB also argued this point, that if they were restored to their "natural default orientation as heterosexual" this means "they were not real homosexuals to begin with but merely socially in homosexual relations."In cases like you describe, those like Milo were never gay. Those like Chirlene were never lesbian. Someone in their lives when they were young gave them pleasure and convinced them of their homosexuality. They were given friends, a support structure. Then if they showed the slightest inclination of normalcy they are told that they will be alone. Their friends will leave. Their support will crumble. They become resigned and take joy in the life resignation gives them.
I always find it cute how people who have never taken a University science course in their life like to tout "science" as backing up their assertions.
Why is it that ACTUAL scientists can dig up the bones of people who died millennia ago and know whether they were male or female yet these imposters of today don't know the difference when dealing with living, breathing people?
Sorry, just don't feel like mocking or calling childern stupid.lol define 'Hate' in your opinion. I bet it doesn't allow for anybody to mock the stupidity of falling for fake 'science' and fake faggot propaganda campaigns. This is all an agenda peddling by deviants and sociopaths for the get go, and follows the exact same methodologies you're using.
