Right Wing Grifters

Tasfasdf

20Cent wrote: »

Science would disagree.

Your starting to troll yourself

CtevenSrowder

20Cent wrote: »

Science would disagree.

No, it would not.

Name me a person that has changed their biological sex and I'll give you whatever you want i.e. a female who has turned into a man with sperm producing testes that can impregnate women.

I'm going to put you down with anti-vax, flat Earth, the World is only 3000 years old people, because that is the level you are on with your scientific fact denial-ism.

rossie1977

Deleted User wrote: »

Issues being encouraged to grow and develop into "sub"-categories by the left.

Racism. Against white males.
Sexism. Against males. Legal changes to make men marginalized in society.
Promoting feminism far past the case of equality.
Preferential treatment of females in many areas of society.
Social conditioning. Application of drugs and biased psychology in schools to "manage" male children.
Bigotry. Demanding the end of particular religious festivals
Discrimination. Against moderates, those on the right and far right.
Multiculturalism. A theory that has never proven successful in any nation long term.
Media monopolies.
Revisionism of history.
Poverty. Just look at any state in America where the left has gained power. (Bad budgeting and idiotic economic ideas aren't simply the purview of the right).
False Media. Outright lies, and accusations to throw dirt on opponents.

When you say left, what left and who exactly are they?

Racism against white males? Where is this occurring.

Sexism against white males, again where is this occurring on a major scale?

How do you promote feminism far past the case of equality? Is there a segment of society calling for women to rule over men or something?

Who is demanding the end to religious festivals?

Multiculturalism is being encouraged by the left, where? China certainly isn't promoting it. The US is a multicultural society, do you think it's not successful?

There is discrimination by the left in Western society against moderates, right wing and far rights folks..where? Do you think the current president of the US, Brazil or Hungary, Poland or Russia are left wing?

Who are these folks encouraging media monopolies? In the last few years it's been the likes of Sinclair and Fox buying up tons of real estate in the US

Examples of revision of history?

Left hasn't 'gained power' in any US state. US politics is far right, little less far right, strongly conservative and right of centre. There are a handful of socialist independents but none control their state. The poorest states in the union are strongly conservative so I don't understand your point.

False media..you mean like Fox News or Breitbart which have been attempting to con the audience for two decades. Have folks been asking for media to Photoshop their rivals to look like monster's? https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fox-news-photoshops-pictu_n_110486?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALWX-CZFJ1-Q5vklrROCdejGIuBNRVF4qBmoCdQmmkDA-bNNKIiNnoFENApo35HkkCWawKGAgqIPy2AmZ-r6CKE1B9TSzFuGJGOC0pys5t0uYCer9h32OdKqm0la1NSMHHM43dTGMuvRYP8vwfj_1f-7s1TuIdBPEEOP91Of4qhY

If this supposed 'left' are encouraging these issues they are doing a terrible job of it actually. Women are still quite a bit aways from being considered equal in society, I haven't seen a single religious festival cancelled, the big media moves have come from right wing companies etc.

20Cent

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

No, it would not.

Name me a person that has changed their biological sex and I'll give you whatever you want i.e. a female who has turned into a man with sperm producing testes that can impregnate women.

I'm going to put you down with anti-vax, flat Earth, the World is only 3000 years old people, because that is the level you are on with your scientific fact denial-ism.

Lots of men don't produce sperm that can't impregnate a woman, are they not "real" men?
Lots of women can't get pregnant and don't have periods as well.

CtevenSrowder

20Cent wrote: »

Lots of men don't produce sperm that can't impregnate a woman, are they not "real" men?
Lots of women can't get pregnant and don't have periods as well.

Heres the definition again: of or denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.

Notice the use of the word "may".

Now, can you name me a person that has changed their biological sex or not?

Or better still, why not just admit you are wrong, and not continue to dig a hole.

Kidchameleon

20Cent wrote: »

Science would disagree.

Male = XY
Female = X

20Cent

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Heres the definition again: of or denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.

Notice the use of the word "may".

Now, can you name me a person that has changed their biological sex or not?

Or better still, why not just admit you are wrong, and not continue to dig a hole.

So infertile people aren't male or female either according to your definition.

If you're resorting to silly semantic arguments and name calling for a lot of your arguments, maybe it's time to call it a day..

CtevenSrowder

20Cent wrote: »

So infertile people aren't male or female either according to your definition.

So no, you can't name me anyone who has changed their biological sex. Are there any examples in the peer reviewed scientific literature?

I'll help you out. There aren't, because it's not possible.

Boggles

Tasfasdf wrote: »

George Soros must pay pretty good to keep him going.

Ding Ding Ding.

Drink, Drink!

CtevenSrowder

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Male = XY
Female = X

He's far left. If he were far right he'd be arguing in favour of something just as preposterous and using all the same disingenuous techniques. Stating that the scientific consensus is wrong with no evidence as to why, being pedantic in the extreme, refusing to answer tough questions, science denial-ism in general etc.

Two sides of the same coin really.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

So infertile people aren't male or female either according to your definition.

Not at all. Men are born with a penis, women are born with a vagina. If, for some reason, the sexual organs don't work, that doesn't negate the FACT that they are still biologically a man or a woman, right down to their DNA.

The fact that they may have body dysmorphia does not change their DNA, it merely changes how they want to define themselves.

20Cent wrote: »

If you went to your local GP and told them you think you have body dysphoria they would send you to a specialist. They certainly wouldn't announce you are wrong. It's the uneducated dumbass who would claim to know better than the person themselves on one meeting.

I agree. I think that if someone told me they had body dysmorphia, I would be a dumbass to tell them they didn't. I couldn't possibly know.

What has that got to do with anything?

20Cent

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

So no, you can't name me anyone who has changed their biological sex. Are there any examples in the peer reviewed scientific literature?

I'll help you out. There aren't, because it's not possible.

Whats it yo you anyway if someone wants to change gender?
How does it effect your life?
Why do you care so much?

Why is this even a topic in this thread like it's a fraction of 1% of the population?

Right wing grifters make out like it's a huge issue and the main concern of "the left". Never heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it, it's just not something most people ever deal with or are concerned with.

CtevenSrowder

20Cent wrote: »

Whats it yo you anyway if someone wants to change gender?
How does it effect your life?
Why do you care so much?

Why is this even a topic in this thread like it's a fraction of 1% of the population?

Right wing grifters make out like it's a huge issue and the main concern of "the left". Never heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it, it's just not something most people ever deal with or are concerned with.

I care about science, and I will always take people up when they claim they know better than the scientific consensus with absolutely no evidence to the contrary, which is exactly what you did. You can't name someone who has changed their sex because it is not possible to change your sex. You are simply wrong.

If someone wants to turn their penis into a vagina, and take hormones to grow beasts etc. then I say good luck to them. I'll call them she and her. I will not except that they are now actually female, for the simple reason that they are not.

It's a topic due to the influence of American far-left progressive political ****e (the kind of politics you ascribe to in fact) on our politics here (Ireland and particularly Britain). Your obsession with the American far right and the word grifter is an attestment to this. I mean, this is your thread.

nkl12xtw5goz70

20Cent wrote: »

Never heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it

He's done so many times. Maybe you just need to pay more attention?

CtevenSrowder

Jaelyn Uptight Speedway wrote: »

He's done so many times. Maybe you just need to pay more attention?

He's to busy moaning about obscure American right wing "grifters" to do that.

20Cent

Jaelyn Uptight Speedway wrote: »

He's done so many times. Maybe you just need to pay more attention?

One article.
He says to allow people to self-identify as transgender.
Don't see anything wrong with that, why is it such a big issue with you lot?

20Cent

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

I care about science, and I will always take people up when they claim they know better than the scientific consensus with absolutely no evidence to the contrary, which is exactly what you did. You can't name someone who has changed their sex because it is not possible to change your sex. You are simply wrong.

If someone wants to turn their penis into a vagina, and take hormones to grow beasts etc. then I say good luck to them. I'll call them she and her. I will not except that they are now actually female, for the simple reason that they are not.

It's a topic due to the influence of American far-left progressive political ****e (the kind of politics you ascribe to in fact) on our politics here (Ireland and particularly Britain). Your obsession with the American far right and the word grifter is an attestment to this. I mean, this is your thread.

A valiant and principled stand to take*.





*no one could care less.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Whats it yo you anyway if someone wants to change gender?
How does it effect your life?
Why do you care so much?

Why is this even a topic in this thread like it's a fraction of 1% of the population?

Right wing grifters make out like it's a huge issue and the main concern of "the left". Never heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it, it's just not something most people ever deal with or are concerned with.

This topic came up because you kept asking me questions about it after I pointed out your hypocrisy when it comes to insulting people based on their appearance.

Deleted User wrote: »

Ad hominems too?

I'm not triggered.

All I did was point out that you exemplify the hypocrisy of the "left" , who have no problem calling tommy robinson a midget, trump a fat orange prick but yet cry hate speech if you try to say that men can't have periods.

I am in no way bothered by your use of insults. I just find it amusing so pointed it out.

You then made a point of laughing at the absurdity of men having periods

20Cent wrote: »

"Man you really had to dig deep into the bowels of the fringe of the internet to find something to get offended about. Man periods lol.

After I explained I wasn't offended, just merely pointing out that telling someone who believes that men can have periods that they can't, would be looked as some sort of hateful rhetoric.

You seem to have flip flopped on that one. From laughing at the absurdity to taking offence on their behalf even though none was taken by them.

Hardly surprising

nkl12xtw5goz70

20Cent wrote: »

One article.

One of many articles — Corbyn has been discussing it a lot of late, given that Labour's current election manifesto pledges to reform the Gender Recognition Act to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, rather than having them assessed by medical and legal experts.

Oddly, you seem better informed about obscure alt-right YouTubers than about what the UK Labour Party leader is talking about in the run-up to a general election.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Never heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it,

20Cent wrote: »

One article.

20Cent

Jaelyn Uptight Speedway wrote: »

One of many articles — Corbyn has been discussing it a lot of late, given that Labour's current election manifesto pledges to reform the Gender Recognition Act to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, rather than having them assessed by medical and legal experts.

Oddly, you seem better informed about obscure alt-right YouTubers than about what the UK Labour Party leader is talking about in the run-up to a general election.

Permanent long time no see.
Would have thought a freedom loving chap like yourself would be all for people having the freedom to self identify without the big guvment deciding for them.

20Cent

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This topic came up because you kept asking me questions about it after I pointed out your hypocrisy when it comes to insulting people based on their appearance.



You then made a point of laughing at the absurdity of men having periods



After I explained I wasn't offended, just merely pointing out that telling someone who believes that men can have periods that they can't, would be looked as some sort of hateful rhetoric.

You seem to have flip flopped on that one. From laughing at the absurdity to taking offence on their behalf even though none was taken by them.

Hardly surprising

Can't say I've ever thought about men having periods before strangely it's never come up but I suppose if someone is transitioning female to male or doesn't want to take hormones they will be having periods.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Can't say I've ever thought about men having periods before strangely it's never come up but I suppose if someone is transitioning female to male or doesn't want to take hormones they will be having periods.

That's probably because you don't ever talk honestly to trans people about it. I guess that's what happens when you wish to remain ignorant.

20Cent

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's probably because you don't ever talk honestly to trans people about it. I guess that's what happens when you wish to remain ignorant.

Have only met one trans person that I know of. Periods didn't come up in the conversation oddly enough just talked about normal stuff. Don't think I've ever asked anyone what their gender is, that's their business.

The logical consequences of questionable ideology..

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Have only met one trans person that I know of. Periods didn't come up in the conversation oddly enough just talked about normal stuff. Don't think I've ever asked anyone what their gender is, that's their business.

But I suppose the interesting thing about all of this is that you admit that regardless of the absurdity of any claims a transgender person makes regarding their body, you will believe them wholesale. You even went as far as calling me a massive dick and egotistical for not doing as you would do.

You have avoided answering any follow up questions about where you choose to draw a line in the sand and use reasoning to dispute any claims and whether or not this only applies to transgenderism. I wonder why that is?

I was hoping to make a joke about setting up a Patreon, a collection, cents, dollar to sterling conversion rates, old money new money conversion rates, and someone being the full shilling; but alas, the maths don't add up..

Gynoid

20Cent wrote: »

. Never heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it, it's just not something most people ever deal with or are concerned with.

Under Jeremy Corbyns direction there are numerous transwomen occupying places on Womens shortlists for parliamentary seats. Under his direction Lily Madigan, a spiteful, vicious person, a transwoman, who has made many rape / death threats to women, publicly gloated over Magdalen Berns' (a lesbian activist) death from brain cancer and has been repeatedly accused of sexual assault, is the Labour Partys Womans Officer.
I kid you not.
Keep up, 20 cents.

Nermal

20Cent wrote: »

One article.
He says to allow people to self-identify as transgender.
Don't see anything wrong with that, why is it such a big issue with you lot?

No-one has a problem with self-identification, it's being asked to play along that's the problem...

blanch152

20Cent wrote: »

Whats it yo you anyway if someone wants to change gender?
How does it effect your life?
Why do you care so much?

.

This is why it is so hard to discuss anything with ideologues of the left in Ireland. The goalposts keep moving, the arguments keep shifting and we get one long disingenuous monologue that everyone else is wrong.

See how we are now talking about gender.

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

A trans person doesn't change their sex. You cannot change from male to female. Look up the definitions of the word if you want to understand why.

They are words based in biological fact. Actually here, I'll give you the definitions:

Male: of or denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.

Female: of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes.

You cannot change sex, it's debatable whether you can really change gender, as opposed to the mere outward appearence of your body.

20Cent wrote: »

Science would disagree.

The original discussion was about changing sex, not gender.

When that argument was lost by 20 cent, he shifted into attack mode on a completely different premise. The aim was to make people feel bad about genuine science, even making it up.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

This is why it is so hard to discuss anything with ideologues of the left in Ireland. The goalposts keep moving, the arguments keep shifting and we get one long disingenuous monologue that everyone else is wrong.

See how we are now talking about gender.







The original discussion was about changing sex, not gender.

When that argument was lost by 20 cent, he shifted into attack mode on a completely different premise. The aim was to make people feel bad about genuine science, even making it up.

Yeah, it is an all to common tactic. When backed into a corner with questions that would expose his hypocrisy no matter how he answers, questions are ignored, goalposts are moved and ad hominems appear.

It would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.

Lefty Bicek

Gynoid wrote: »

Under Jeremy Corbyns direction there are numerous transwomen occupying places on Womens shortlists for parliamentary seats. Under his direction Lily Madigan, a spiteful, vicious person, a transwoman, who has made many rape / death threats to women, publicly gloated over Magdalen Berns' (a lesbian activist) death from brain cancer and has been repeatedly accused of sexual assault, is the Labour Partys Womans Officer.
I kid you not.
Keep up, 20 cents.

This is as good a moment as any to introduce the UK's first 'sex change parliamentarian'...

Nikki Sinclaire MEP.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/politics/344347/im-nikki-the-first-sex-swap-mep-in-britain/

I see Nikki there, gladhanding with Thatcher, Cameron, and... Nigel Farage.

Imagine that.

20Cent

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

This is as good a moment as any to introduce the UK's first 'sex change parliamentarian'...

Nikki Sinclaire MEP.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/politics/344347/im-nikki-the-first-sex-swap-mep-in-britain/

I see Nikki there, gladhanding with Thatcher, Cameron, and... Nigel Farage.

Imagine that.

What's this issue with this?

Slowyourrole

20Cent wrote: »

So in another thread I keep seeing people posting content from these right wing sources that are such obvious grifters, there to cash in.
The king of them was of course Alex Jones who lead the way with fake news and fake controversies in order to sell junk like vitamin pills to people. There are now loads of them, his protege Paul Joseph Watson for example. There is a whole mini industry out there. All they do is spread what they think their audience wants to hear and they lap it up. No lie or exaggeration is too much. They will still get the clicks, likes and sales. Have asked before but not seeing similar behaviour on the left.

Why are such obvious frauds and misinformation so popular with right wingers?
Why aren't they calling them out themselves?

Because they rarely hold the moral or research based high ground and people like Alex Jones help them feel their bigoted views are acceptable and logic based..

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Because they rarely hold the moral or research based high ground and people like Alex Jones help them feel their bigoted views are acceptable and logic based..

Jesus. You're responding to 20cent saying that his side has the logical and moral highground?

Wouldn't be a fan of Alex Jones myself but apart from him what bigoted views are you talking about?

Very interested in hearing because I will know how to tailor my reponse based on your answer.

Odhinn

Gynoid wrote: »

Under Jeremy Corbyns direction there are numerous transwomen occupying places on Womens shortlists for parliamentary seats. Under his direction Lily Madigan, a spiteful, vicious person, a transwoman, who has made many rape / death threats to women, publicly gloated over Magdalen Berns' (a lesbian activist) death from brain cancer and has been repeatedly accused of sexual assault, is the Labour Partys Womans Officer.
I kid you not.
Keep up, 20 cents.

Would you have a source for that, by any chance?

Slowyourrole

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus. You're responding to 20cent saying that his side has the logical and moral highground?

Wouldn't be a fan of Alex Jones myself but apart from him what bigoted views are you talking about?

Very interested in hearing because I will know how to tailor my reponse based on your answer.

Your question isn't clear. Are you looking to know what views are bigoted or what sources spout them?

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Your question isn't clear. Are you looking to know what views are bigoted or what sources spout them?

My apologies. I wasn't very clear at all.

What bigoted views do you think that the majority of the people that 20Cent class as (shudder) grifters spout?

I think we can all pretty much discount Alex Jones as we all agree that the majority of what he comes out with is pantomime and showmanship, and can all agree that some of his stuff has been very damaging (sandy hook et al)

Tommy Robinson is another that I don't need an explanation about as because of his dodgy past and the fact that he mainly targets muslims in his "investigations" he has been discussed to death at this stage

I'm more interested in what views/opinions do you class as bigoted.

For example, is my stance that trans women should not be allowed access to women-only spaces bigoted? Is my view that there are a signifigant amount of people who follow the Antifa who are violent thugs prevent me from having a moral high ground? Is it bigoted to hold an opinion that borders should be tightly regulated? Does being against modern feminism (toxic misandry if you will) make me a bigot?

Slowyourrole

Deleted User wrote: »

My apologies. I wasn't very clear at all.

What bigoted views do you think that the majority of the people that 20Cent class as (shudder) grifters spout?

I think we can all pretty much discount Alex Jones as we all agree that the majority of what he comes out with is pantomime and showmanship, and can all agree that some of his stuff has been very damaging (sandy hook et al)

Tommy Robinson is another that I don't need an explanation about as because of his dodgy past and the fact that he mainly targets muslims in his "investigations" he has been discussed to death at this stage

I'm more interested in what views/opinions do you class as bigoted.

For example, is my stance that trans women should not be allowed access to women-only spaces bigoted? Is my view that there are a signifigant amount of people who follow the Antifa who are violent thugs prevent me from having a moral high ground? Is it bigoted to hold an opinion that borders should be tightly regulated? Does being against modern feminism (toxic misandry if you will) make me a bigot?

Those seem pretty central views.

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Those seem pretty central views.

Grand. Just wanted to make sure that we were on the same page. With a lot of posters on here, those opinions alone would be enough to class you as an Alt-Right bigot.

Slowyourrole

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand. Just wanted to make sure that we were on the same page. With a lot of posters on here, those opinions alone would be enough to class you as an Alt-Right bigot.

I guess it comes down to how you try to justify those opinions. For example, iIf you want to tightly regulate immigration because of the homeless crisis or overburdened health care system then that's reasonable and fair. If you want to do it because you think it will bring a flood of rapists or Muslims are violent then that's fairly bigoted.

Slowyourrole

Slowyourrole wrote: »

I guess it comes down to how you try to justify those opinions. For example, iIf you want to tightly regulate immigration because of the homeless crisis or overburdened health care system then that's reasonable and fair. If you want to do it because you think it will bring a flood of rapists or Muslims are violent then that's fairly bigoted.

I agree with you on the most part.

I don't agree that preventing undocumented refugees coming in for safety reasons is bigoted. It would be bigoted in my opinion if the reason was solely because they were muslim. Undocumented migrants or refugees, regardless of their creed should be subject to the highest degree of vetting.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree with you on the most part.

I don't agree that preventing undocumented refugees coming in for safety reasons is bigoted. It would be bigoted in my opinion if the reason was solely because they were muslim. Undocumented migrants or refugees, regardless of their creed should be subject to the highest degree of vetting.

Why?

The vast vast majority of foreign people who enter the state and commit crime are not asylum seekers.

Surely if you are so paranoid about foreigners and what they might be up to you would want them all subjected to "highest degree of vetting".

And if not, why not?

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Why?

The vast vast majority of foreign people who enter the state and commit crime are not asylum seekers.

Surely if you are so paranoid about foreigners and what they might be up to you would want them all subjected to "highest degree of vetting".

And if not, why not?

Well, ignoring your unwarranted passive aggression, it is my opinion that if someone is undocumented and entering the country, we have no way of immediately verifying who they are and where they come from so therefore would need higher vetting to establish they are who they say they are before being granted admission.

I'm not paranoid about foreigners and the claim that I am is ridiculous. I just want a secure border. Sorry if you don't find that palatable.

rgossip30

There is a lack of Stats for crimes committed by foreigners . I assume its a cover up but its a larger figure in other EU countries given their lower numbers than the native population .

I doubt this article from 2002 would be accepted now but regarded as racist hate speech today .
https://www.google.com/search?q=crimes+non+nationals+ireland&rlz=1C1CHBF_enPH872PH872&oq=crimes+non+nationals+ireland&aqs=chrome..69i57j33.12260j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, ignoring your unwarranted passive aggression, it is my opinion that if someone is undocumented and entering the country, we have no way of immediately verifying who they are and where they come from so therefore would need higher vetting to establish they are who they say they are before being granted admission.

I'm not paranoid about foreigners and the claim that I am is ridiculous. I just want a secure border. Sorry if you don't find that palatable.

You are just paranoid about one type of foreigner?

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

You are just paranoid about one type of foreigner?

Are you saying it's paranoid to know who is coming in or out of a country?

Get a grip.

**** sake. You do anything to paint anyone as a racist or a xenophobe. Documented immigration is now xenophobic? You heard it here first ladies and gents.

Boggles, the open borders paragon of virtue.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you saying it's paranoid to know who is coming in or out of a country?

No, I'm saying it's paranoid to focus on a group that make up a fraction of foreigners who come into our country.

Or do you think that someone who comes into the country with a passport is somehow background checked and vetted?

They aren't. Works the other way too.

Last I heard Larry Murphy was free to inter rail around Europe if he wants.

rgossip30

Boggles wrote: »

No, I'm saying it's paranoid to focus on a group that make up a fraction of foreigners who come into our country.

Or do you think that someone who comes into the country with a passport is somehow background checked and vetted?

They aren't. Works the other way too.

Last I heard Larry Murphy was free to inter rail around Europe if he wants.

At least they have ID unlike those who turn up for asylum without any documents .