The Colorado Springs Quandary

[Ana the Ist]

It doesn't really matter honestly. The importance is not in his gender specifically but that his gender identity ends the whole "it's all Christians fault" rhetoric. It at least should.

That's really the only point that matters where his gender is concerned.

I'm not interested in arguments about how it's wrong to politicize this tragedy...if people weren't making that same argument before this one detail leaked to the public.


There's 3 or 4 other threads about this event and I'm curious if anyone here was pushing a political narrative in those.

 

[rjs330]

I'm not interested in arguments about how it's wrong to politicize this tragedy...if people weren't making that same argument before this one detail leaked to the public.


There's 3 or 4 other threads about this event and I'm curious if anyone here was pushing a political narrative in those.

One definitely did. I can't find the other one now.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I find it difficult to believe that at least two people see no problem with it. That, assuming it's just happened, it can be put down as just a coincidence.

Wanna buy a bridge?

@Bradskii I'm fully aware that this announcement comes with a possible ulterior motive....


Guess what....they all do.


Remember that guy who decided he was a woman in time to break every woman's collegiate swimming record? Ulterior motive.

Every time they argue over which bathroom to use, which prison to go to, etc....there's a possible ulterior motive.

My favorites are the parents who livestream their child and ask them why they support whatever group....and the kid goofs up and says "because you made me". When teachers are heaping special attention on kids who announce they're different in this way....it becomes motive for the other kids.

This situation is not different...it's exactly the same.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Hmm. I don't know much about the case admittedly, but I don't see much reason why he'd want to avoid the hate crime charges by announcing himself as "non-binary". He'll be rotting in prison or given the death penalty (depending on where he lives) regardless. The threat of a hate crime charge seems pretty trivial and pointless. In group hatred is a real thing, and the LGBT+ is no exception. It's not out of the realms of possibility that he's a member of the LGBT+ who has some weird beef with other members of the LGBT+ community.

Yeah who knows.

Humans are complex, and sometimes their motivations don't always align to the narrative leftists or rightest want or expect.

I do think it's best to avoid sexualizing issues with children as much as possible, I am skeptical of how much this is actually going on in leftist circles. The bar I have is somewhat higher than the idea that telling your classmates that your partner is the same sex is somehow "grooming" them. Like every other group, there are bad apples and I'm sure some incidents we see coming from the left merit's discussion and worry, but at the same time you can point the same to some on the right who view no problem taking children to an establishment like hooters for example.

It seems like it's a little bit different from that.

It would be a remarkable coincidence if this all started happening across the nation, in public schools, at the same time.

 

[rjs330]

I find it difficult to believe that at least two people see no problem with it. That, assuming it's just happened, it can be put down as just a coincidence.

Wanna buy a bridge?

I still wonder what his motive would be for suddenly becoming LGBTQ. What's he going to accomplish by it? Getting sent to a woman's prison?

 

[Bradskii]

Love being unique. And if you have no idea what your subconscious does how can you possibly know that it has subconscious racism?

Do you not understand that experiments show that certain conditions trigger subconscious reactions? Most of what we do is below the level at which we are conscious of making decisions. You react subconciously to any number of influences just as we all do. And you think you are unique?

It's quite a moment when we discover we're not. It's quite a moment when we realise that we are so similar. That we are governed by the same urges and biases as are other people. It's a certain liberation to come to terms with that. Because it means that if you understand what makes you tick, you have an opportunity to change the path that your subconscious chooses.

And I'm not going to be able to persuade you of this, but if you are the least racist person that you know, it doesn't mean that you have no racist tendencies.

 

[Bradskii]

I'm fully aware that this announcement comes with a possible ulterior motive....

Then why argue against it's possibility?

You seem to argue for the sake of it. You've made a few posts deriding the suggestion and now say that you are fully aware of why it was made. And you still can't accept it without attaching to it a few facile and utterly irrelevant points about transgenderism. Just...what?

 

[Bradskii]

I still wonder what his motive would be for suddenly becoming LGBTQ. What's he going to accomplish by it? Getting sent to a woman's prison?

I'm finding this astonishingly difficult to get across. You seem to know nothing about the case. Please listen up...

The scum is charged with murder. He might also, in addition, be charged with a hate crime. They are two separate fellonies. His lawyer has put forward the suggestion that this piece of dirt is himself gay proposing thereby that it wasn't therefore a hate crime. Implying that he couldn't hate gays because he was gay himself. Go figure that proposal yourself, but it it's proposed for that reason.

It might be true. It might not. But the motive for bringing it up should now be crystal clear.

 

[Ana the Ist]

But there are experiments and tests that show them.

No there aren't. The implicit bias test lacks what science calls "reliability".

As far as tests go....it's about as good as a Rorschach test.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Then why argue against it's possibility?

Once you admit it's possibility....you've gone against the entire movement.

There's no way to prove or disprove any of this stuff. What possible justification exists for putting a kid on hormones and puberty blockers if he might be motivated by something other than gender dysphoria? How would a kid know if they were simply doing it out of peer or parent pressure as opposed to genuine internal conflict?

Why would we ever allow biological men to compete with women? Why would we ever house male inmates with female ones?

The whole affirmative care model looks like a horrible money making scheme damaging innumerable people.

You can't entertain the possibility these claims are fake and then advocate for them as if they're all true.

 

[Bradskii]

No there aren't. The implicit bias test lacks what science calls "reliability".

As far as tests go....it's about as good as a Rorschach test.

I guess maybe that you're someone else who has no subconscious biases. That's two so far. I wonder if we'll find anyone else.

 

[Bradskii]

Once you admit it's possibility....you've gone against the entire movement.

You just did!

There's no way to prove or disprove any of this stuff. What possible justification exists for putting a kid on hormones and puberty blockers if he might be motivated by something other than gender dysphoria? How would a kid know if they were simply doing it out of peer or parent pressure as opposed to genuine internal conflict?

Why would we ever allow biological men to compete with women? Why would we ever house male inmates with female ones?

The whole affirmative care model looks like a horrible money making scheme damaging innumerable people.

You can't entertain the possibility these claims are fake and then advocate for them as if they're all true.

Yet again another entire post about absolutely nothing to do with the point being raised.

I guess I could start a thread about the best recipe for a vindaloo and somehow you'd bring up transgenderism, kids on hormones, men and women in sport, affermative care, genderism in prisons (just...what?) and no end of distractions.

We're done. I like talking to people who can grasp a topic and discuss it reasonably. Unless you have some input that's relevant..? Otherwise, stop wasting my time.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I guess maybe that you're someone else who has no subconscious biases. That's two so far. I wonder if we'll find anyone else.

How would I know if I have subconscious biases? They're subconscious. There's no way to detect or change them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You just did!

I never supported the movement.

I support the right for adults to do what they want....if they want surgery, go for it.

It's not a reason for widespread societal change.

Yet again another entire post about absolutely nothing to do with the point being raised.

You raised a point?

I guess I could start a thread about the best recipe for a vindaloo and somehow you'd bring up transgenderism, kids on hormones, men and women in sport, affermative care, genderism in prisons (just...what?) and no end of distractions.

Tell it to CNN. You suggested that people who are "biased" against said people are to blame for this lol.

Now you want to pretend that I'm off topic.

We're done. I like talking to people who can grasp a topic and discuss it reasonably. Unless you have some input that's relevant..? Otherwise, stop wasting my time.

You can leave the thread any time. This isn't going great for you.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I guess maybe that you're someone else who has no subconscious biases. That's two so far. I wonder if we'll find anyone else.

Why do you keep bringing up subconscious biases?

You can't tell what anyone's subconscious biases are....whenever you accuse people of subconscious biases you're just displaying your conscious biases.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Murderers don't get fair treatment from me. Retribution is a real thing.

It is actually a gender neutral placeholder for a pronoun. It makes more sense linguistically than they/them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You just did!

Yet again another entire post about absolutely nothing to do with the point being raised.

I guess I could start a thread about the best recipe for a vindaloo and somehow you'd bring up transgenderism, kids on hormones, men and women in sport, affermative care, genderism in prisons (just...what?) and no end of distractions.

We're done. I like talking to people who can grasp a topic and discuss it reasonably. Unless you have some input that's relevant..? Otherwise, stop wasting my time.

To quote someone who brought up the topic of a certain community advocating certain issues...

I'll be blaming everyone who is derogatory to gay people. And those who want to use a get-out-of-jail card by claiming some thug was himself gay will find it's no longer valid.

Heal thyself.

If you missed the point of the OP, it wasn't just about pronouns, it was about the foolish masses who jump at the first chance to politicize an issue and blame people needlessly.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's just so rare I've seen a solid understanding of what gender means.

That's exactly what the advocates argue.

To even question someone's gender is considered bigotry.

That's the "rule" they go by.

If we can just question what someone's gender is....despite what they claim....what does "transphobic" even mean?

Person #1 claim- "I'm actually a woman who was born in the body of a man."

Person #2 claim- "I don't think so....you're actually a man."

The only way that person #2 can be ever called transphobic or bigoted or any other such accusation.....is if person #1's claim is always accepted as true.

It doesn't matter what circumstances the claim is made under.

How did you not know this?

Why did you think it got called "gender ideology"?

Why did you think the "affirmative care model" doesn't involve any questioning of someone's gender claim?

 

[rambot]

That's exactly what the advocates argue.

To even question someone's gender is considered bigotry.

That's the "rule" they go by.

If we can just question what someone's gender is....despite what they claim....what does "transphobic" even mean?

Person #1 claim- "I'm actually a woman who was born in the body of a man."

Person #2 claim- "I don't think so....you're actually a man."

The only way that person #2 can be ever called transphobic or bigoted or any other such accusation.....is if person #1's claim is always accepted as true.

It doesn't matter what circumstances the claim is made under.

How did you not know this?

Why did you think it got called "gender ideology"?

Why did you think the "affirmative care model" doesn't involve any questioning of someone's gender claim?

It's not what we argue. It's what we see.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's not what we argue. It's what we see.

You don't see anything.

Apparently that includes the entire argument for all these made up genders and pronouns.

That's bizarre to me....because it indicates that the whole reason that some posters here hold this position is because their peers hold it, they've given it no more thought than that.