Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[unapologetic]

They are just asking you to respect those beliefs.

There are various degrees of 'respect'. I don't disrespect trans. Their opinions about sex or identity are none of my business. And I don't care. More respect than that needs to be earned. And it hasn't been.

Your statement here seems to suggest that trans people should not be allowed to have beliefs that differ from yours,

Like religion, don't bother me with your beliefs about your private business. Like religion, it's all mental, and not my problem.

Believe it or not, the mind is in fact a body part.

Are you suggesting Brain Surgery? (of course you're not) So get therapy, not surgery. And stay out of politics.

Again: This is not my problem. Not my issue. I am done talking about trans.

 

[Jarhyn]

They are just asking you to respect those beliefs.

There are various degrees of 'respect'. I don't disrespect trans. Their opinions about sex or identity are none of my business. And I don't care. More respect than that needs to be earned. And it hasn't been.

Your statement here seems to suggest that trans people should not be allowed to have beliefs that differ from yours,

Like religion, don't bother me with your beliefs about your private business. Like religion, it's all mental, and not my problem.

Believe it or not, the mind is in fact a body part.

Are you suggesting Brain Surgery? (of course you're not) So get therapy, not surgery. And stay out of politics.

Again: This is not my problem. Not my issue. I am done talking about trans.

If it's not your problem or issue and you lack the perspective to have any empathy about it, please kindly say nothing about it.

Don't even pretend your understanding of what is going on is even remotely accurate because it isn't.

Respectfully, please shove off and and quit acting as if you understand that it is not about 'opinion' and honestly, I lost a bit of respect when I read that from. You.

It is not an "opinion" when the piece of meat between someone's legs grows into a penis or a vagina or something not clearly either and it is not an "opinion" when the piece of meat between their ears gross I into a penis *driver* instead of a vagina *driver*, or something not clearly either.

Imagine for a moment that you have a computer, no internet, no administrative permissions, and the unique driver software for NVIDIA graphics cards installed on that machine, but there's just one problem: the graphics card actually sitting in the slot is AMD.

Of course, the graphics work badly, because it has the wrong drivers.

Its not like opening up the screen every day as a user and seeing Libre office when you want to see Word, no, it's the fucking graphics having lines or artifacts or the monitor flashing several times before everything going to low resolution, and half the programs on the machine not working.

It's not a matter of preference. The specialized hardware of the graphics card is not something that software knows how to or is capable of doing, and like the human brain, this software in this particular scenario is actually more hard-baked into the complex parts of the system than the card is: I can just pull that card out and replace it with the right one, whereas with the software I might be reduced to flipping bits on busses with a magnetized needle.

What editor software or what to type into it are opinions; what bus addresses to talk to and what information to put on those busses to be abl to exchange necessary information to render images to the frame buffer is not.

The human brain is similar: there are billions of neurons in your head, and where any ONE of those billions of neurons are is more impactful to who you are and how you must be to successfully live your life than where any million cells are between your legs. There are more neurons in your head than cells in your testicles (except maybe the sperms; they're quite small).

It's way easier to just remove/change some problematic hardware to support a software configuration that can't be changed at this point than it is to try and rewrite software.

That is not an opinion. That is a fact.

So please quit acting as if trans people are talking about or holding problematic "opinions" of themselves.

 

[laughing dog]

Getting back to the thread, even though I didn’t wish Mr Kirk’s death, I think the world will be a better place without him in the long run.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Like religion, don't bother me with your beliefs about your private business. Like religion, it's all mental, and not my problem.

Nevertheless I would still be against violence or discrimination against religious people just because they're religious, regardless of whether it is "mental". I would even be highly against banning religion. Similarly I am against violence or discrimination against trans people, who experience violence and discrimination.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I accept that Kirk believes transgender people are mentally ill. Nothing I have seen from Kirk (and I haven't seen everything by any means) suggests in any fashion that Kirk thinks they should be hated - that's something that you and other ideologically motivated people are applying to him based on your beliefs, not his.

Note that most mental illness does not warrant locking someone up. You only lock them up if they pose a danger to society.

That said, I do believe that some are mentally ill. For those who genuinely and deeply believe that their body is the wrong body, to such an extent that they feel compelled to harm healthy tissue in order to make their exterior mimic what their brain envisions, I think it's a mental illness. It's in the same category as body integrity identity disorder, anorexia, etc. This used to be referred to as transexualism, and it's a very specific and narrow definition.

And why do you think they don't fall into this category?

For example, a massive number of young females who express dysphoria and identify as trans, they've had a history of childhood sexual abuse that is amplified by puberty and the way other people look at their bodies, and a feeling of being exposed and vulnerable because they're developing adult secondary sex traits. Instead of actually dealing with their prior trauma, they have substituted their sexed body as being to blame for their distress.

This could manifest in a desire not to have the sexual parts, but why want the opposite?

Similarly a large number of young males (and some females) are autistic, and they mistakenly latch onto transgender for two primary reasons. First is the delay or suppression of the development of romantic bonding that is a common component of autism, and they end up interpreting the fact that they aren't feeling that emotional pull to bond with others as being indicative of their body being wrong, when it's actually their neural development that is the root. Paired with this is the current love-bombing that occurs when someone comes out as trans, and this is something that autistic youth are even more susceptible to than others. For someone who has always had trouble connecting with others, suddenly being embraced and accepted and welcomed and celebrated is a powerful emotional hook. Those two things combine with the tendency of autistic people to fixate on ideas and beliefs, and can very quickly lead to the errant belief that they're transgender at an age where their cognitive development is delayed relative to their peers.

1) You're describing asexuals.

2) The lack of romantic bonding is generally through inability, not through a lack of desire.

3) You're looking back to something that they pretty much can't see looking forward.

There are also at least some people who are trying to "trans away the gay", either due to their own inability to accept their sexual orientation or due to pressures from others. Iran, for example, will pay for sex trait modification surgeries and hormones - because the choice for gay men is to either be killed or to transition. Of note, gay women are of no account since women are essentially property and their sexual orientation doesn't matter if some guy wants to marry and have sex with them. But that's an entirely different topic.

Iran, yes, but that doesn't mean it's a meaningful factor outside legal compulsion.

There are a host of different causes and drivers that result in someone identifying as trans, and I'm not going to try to talk about all of them. But I will touch on one more: transvestic autogynephilia. A whole lot of activists want to pretend this doesn't exist, or that it doesn't matter, or they want to direct attention away from it. The reality, however, is that a fair number of males who are attracted to females, and who identify as transwomen, are not transexual, they're transvestites. They fetishize the female body, and they've transferred that fetish onto themselves - the root cause of their identification is sexual gratification from pretending to be, or being treated as, women.

No, transvestites are sexually aroused by wearing the wrong attire, they retain their base sexuality.

And note that this motivation could not happen before puberty--anyone who leaned the other way before that certainly isn't a transvestite.

(1) No, I don't think that transgender people genuinely have a differently sexed mind than their bodies. I think the notion is absurd. We *are* our bodies, and our bodies include our brain and our mind. I think it's possible for the brain to be wrong, brains lie to us all the time. But I don't think it's any more possible for a male who identifies as a transwoman to have a "female mind" than it is for an anorexic to have a "fat mind".

1) Why is it absurd? There clearly is a mental layout for male and female, but it's not anything like binary. We see multiple paths where genetics unquestionably produces disorders of applying the male template to the original female body, why should it be strange that something of the sort exists in the mind, also?

2) Anorexics truly have a false perception of their body. Test: Walk through a gap. They keep shrinking the gap. The natural reaction is when the gap is small enough you turn sideways. Anorexics turn for wider gaps than non-anorexics.

(2) No, I don't think that all transgender people are sexual predators, but some of them are. I think the vast majority of people who identify as trans are NOT sexual predators... but sexual offenders are overrepresented among people who identify as trans relative to their prevalence in the population as a whole. I also think that having transgender identity be based on nothing more than what a person says they feel is an open door for sexual predators to exploit. We've seen several cases now of sexual predators taking advantage of this giant loophole in order to do things like show off their dicks to nonconsenting women and children in the female side of the spa, in the women's showers, in women's changing rooms, rape girls in the bathroom, masturbate in rape shelters, and other unconscionable things.

You say "show off"--where is there a case of actually showing off vs simply having. And we still haven't had a solid case of a rape in the bathroom.

(3) Public bathrooms are the least of my concerns... but they're also the thin end of the wedge. My largest concerns are for spaces and services where women are unclothed or particularly vulnerable - showers, nude spas, changing rooms, rape and domestic violence shelters, prisons, etc. The problem with bathrooms is two fold. One problem is that women use restrooms in ways that men don't, it's not uncommon for us to be partially unclothed dealing with a menstrual emergency, or trying to get away from a man who won't take no for an answer, or all sorts of other scenarios. And allowing males to use those same spaces takes that away from us, especially since there's no way at all to determine who's actually trans and who isn't. Given access as a right to males who identify as transwomen on the basis of their declaration of identity necessarily gives that access to any male who wants to enter - there's no way at all to stop them, since there's no way at all to distinguish between them.

Trying to get away is understandable--but note that it's from a male-presenting person, nobody's suggesting that male-presenting people be allowed into such spaces.

The basic problem here is that all the "legitimate" reasons to exclude them sound false. And when you have a plethora of bad reasons that normally means the real issue is discrimination.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's loaded because Emily is not concerned about "predator 'women' " (your phrase), but predator men. Primarily because men are usually much stronger and wield more force.

This is in response to post 1409.

The point would be that predator women are a threat, but not a common one... much like transgender predators. Women face problems from normal males all the time. Emily Lake, as per the norm, concentrates on the less common or trite things for whatever reason. Tens of thousands of men in jail for rape... because we need to has threads about a handful transgender rapes.

Rapes by males are rapes by males. I don't give a fuck how those males identify, nor how they like to dress and adorn themselves. Why the hell do you think I should give special excuses for males who rape women, just because those males have special feelings about their gender? They're still males, and they're still raping women.

Seriously, why the fuck do you think women should be expected to pretend like the sexual offender in question is somehow a special exception because of what they claim their gender identity is? Why should women be expected to ignore and be sanguine about ANY "handful of rapes"?

You keep claiming there are a handful when there are no solid examples. And even if the bad examples are true that's still 1 in a million rapes. You shouldn't be focusing on a one in a million when there are far, far higher risks out there.

But we have a solid example of the MtF being raped in the women's.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Em has so much difficulty here because she's the only woman who dares to be transgender critical.

Yet, she claims that her arguments are "how women feel", and that anyone who disagrees with her does so because they "hate women".

No, I don't.

I do, however, think that a whole lot of you men in this thread care less about women's safety and dignity than you care about the happiness of men. I don't think any of you actually hate women.

The problem here is you are not establishing that it's a safety issue. The actual safety issue is your approach will get FtMs killed.

I can see it being a dignity issue. You were raised with shame about nudity. But I do not believe it's the law's job to protect that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I resent the notion that any kind of unpopular view must come from hate. I don't see any hate coming from Emily or Bomb#20, in fact quite the contrary. They don't deserve the shit they've been handed.

I was sexually assaulted when I was on a camping trip with a bunch of guys from school. I'm a small guy and not a tough guy, and he was drunk as fuck and much bigger. It sucks. I can easily understand if a woman is uncomfortable around men in the bathroom, dressing room, etc. Why in the fuck we should haul these women up as evil and hateful is beyond me.

Have you proposed involuntarily committing all big guys as a punishment for what that specific one did? The hateful part isn't that she has those feelings, the hateful part is what she wants done to innocent people because of those feelings. As a person I don't feel comfortable walking around in certain neighborhoods of my city, but I don't go online and demand that they all be bulldozed and their residents dehomed. People's feelings are their own, but only until they channel those feelings into acts of hatred and violence towards others. That's when a line has to be drawn.

What the actual fuck are you talking about?

Who do I want to have committed for what someone else did? What do you think I want done to innocent people, and can you provide ANY quote that supports your malicious and downright evil mischaracterization?

And where the holy fuck do you get off insinuating that I want neighborhoods bulldozed and people rehomed? Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

This behavior from you is immoral, unethical, and wholly unacceptable.

It's a comparison. He's not saying that you want neighborhoods bulldozed, he's saying that your approach to trans is the equivalent of leveling high crime parts of cities.

 

[Elixir]

It has been over 75 years and I haven’t been molested by, or had anyone I know complain about being molested by, trans people.
Maybe I’ve led a sheltered life. But it occurs to me thst nobody else here has related any personal experience of being molested by trans people.
Maybe I missed it. Maybe half the people I ever met are trans and I didn’t know it. I’ve had a lot of girlfriends who were molested by straight males, but not one by trans males (or trans females, or whatever you call em).
Certainly Emily has had different experiences, or she wouldn’t be so upset about “the problem”.
Can’t say I believe that “the problem” is epidemic.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Is it possible that Kirk was insinuating electroshock therapy etc.? Sure. But that's far from concrete - especially because other people have assumed that he meant they should be beaten up, lynched, or otherwise murdered. Which of you are right? Are you right, because that's what you've interpreted lacking other information? Or are they right because that's what they interpreted lacking other information? Or is someone else who has assumed that in the context in which the comment was made, Kirk meant that in the 50s/60s, good men would remove them from the women's bathroom or otherwise prevent them from entering in the first place?

The problem is extremists (left and right) typically speak in dog whistles. Don't take the pretending they're being reasonable approach, take the approach of looking for how they might be masking extreme things in a guise of reasonable things. They know dog whistles exist, if they say things in a way that looks like a dog whistle figure it probably is.

And look at P2025. It defines presenting as the other gender as being pornography. And it says that exhibiting pornography to minors should get you sent to jail. In other words, being trans in the presence of kids puts you in jail. And you kept denying P2025 but The Felon has admitted it was the plan all along.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This push to treat him like a martyr is absurd and counterproductive. I seriously wish everyone would knock off both extreme ends of this. Stop pretending like he's the antichrist spouting violence and hatred, but also stop pretending he's some saint who's incapable of being mean or petty or wrong.

I'm so fucking tired of this need to make everything so extreme all the time.

It was our Reichstag fire.

And we are making this so extreme for a very good reason. It is extreme. America has just made a very hard turn to evil.