Wokeism of the day *Revised Mod Note in OP and threadbanned users*

Tacitus Kilgore

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Actually, drawing parallels between gay marriage, and this is horse****.

TBH, I find it's moderate supporters of trans issues, like yourself, that are likely to cause the most damage, because you don't see any problem with the "smaller" issues, and so will support the stepping points towards greater acceptance.

No, saying that it's a stepping stone toward forced taking of hormone blockers by all teens is the horseshīt - hysterical horseshīt of the highest order. You're not going to see that, I'm not going to change your mind but I'm sure as shīt going to point it out.

Cool, so being tolerant of someone's right to define themselves is now seen as tacit support of some undefined future "issues". Care to define any others? I'm sure I can try offer my views, they won't be based on hysteria though so might not be the right flavour.

Tacitus Kilgore

Mickey_James wrote: »

The horror show of George Floyds murder? The man was a crook and was resisting arrest. If he did what he was told he'd be alive today.

Why are you calling it a murder so? :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

I will paint you as both hysterical and overdramatic, and justifiably in my view, this is why - because I disagreed with your reply to my post, you automatically presume that I agree that puberty blockers should be given to kids, and also that I agree that they should be able to provide their consent for same. But you presume wrong.

I totally agree that this stuff, when given to people below the age of consent is wreckless, I don't completely understand the technical ends of it so I won't pretend that I do.

I don't think they should be available to teens or anyone below the age of consent, and I don't think that kids have the capacity to genuinely consent to these things, that's my view. (and yours also, it's also quite likely the prevailing view across the board, but don't let this thread fool you)

Your more extreme view that, because there is a campaign to overturn the court ruling - that means that ALL teens, regardless of their orientation will be forced to take puberty blockers until they make up their minds - is, quite frankly, hysterical and overdramatic. Call it a tactic, a smear, a ruse, a trick, a flimflam, whatever, that's just admitting to losing an argument before you've even had it

Excuse me? Where did I say I thought that would happen? I don’t think that will happen. I said that the opinion expressed in the article was extreme. How do you get from there - me saying it’s an extreme view - to me apparently believing that all teens will have to take PBs? Walk me through your thought process there, Tacitus Kilgore, or show me where I said that? You know I didn’t say that and that is very underhand of you to say otherwise. Happy to highlight the underhandedness though.

In reality, I said that whilst the opinion expressed in the article was extreme, many mainstream commentators are very behind PBs in a way that isn’t too far from that extreme view in terms of ethics. And people are not being overdramatic for pointing this out. We already have a judgement that points to the use of PBs being unethical, and the Tavistock’s patchy evidence was exposed to the world.

Mickey_James

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Why are you calling it a murder so? :pac:

Quoting the vicar

Tacitus Kilgore

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Excuse me? Where did I say I thought that would happen? I don’t think that will happen. I said that the opinion expressed in the article was extreme. How do you get from there - me saying it’s an extreme view - to me apparently believing that all teens will have to take PBs? Walk me through your thought process there, Tacitus Kilgore, or show me where I said that?

In reality, I said that whilst the opinion expressed in the article was extreme, many mainstream commentators are very behind PBs in a way that isn’t too far from that extreme view in terms of ethics.

My mistake, I guess I was mixing up an attempt to add legitimacy to the article with a view in agreement of it.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

My mistake, I guess I was mixing up an attempt to add legitimacy to the article with a view in agreement of it.

Well, you’re kind of admitting you were blinkered here. You seem to have decided that any strong reaction to the article was nothing but hysterics. It shows how hard it is to discuss this very complex issue.

Tacitus Kilgore

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

So the silent majority need to speak out about an article written about one person's crap thoughts - which was written specifically to get people like Biko to get outraged about it - and generate clicks etc. Nah, its just triggerbait for the angry bais.


Whoa there - you've been trying to defend brexit for years on the brexit threads - have you just changed your coat or what??

The Brexit thread has nothing to do with this thread,

Brexit is a different issue, but in the sense of woke ideas becoming "accepted" because people keep quiet, the point stands, the silent majority kept quiet and allowed the brexiteers to condition the minds of too many people to thinking a certain way, and many didn't vote as they assumed that Brexit was only in the minds of a small minority.


BTW my viewpoint on Brexit has not changed, just many people don't understand it and incorrectly assume (a dangerous thing to do) that I am pro-brexit. I wanted the UK to be a member of a reformed and looser EU membership, not complete brexit.

Tacitus Kilgore

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, you’re kind of admitting you were blinkered here. You seem to have decided that any strong reaction to the article was nothing but hysterics. It shows how hard it is to discuss this very complex issue.

I'm not at all being honest, but I do agree that this isn't the thread for reasoned discussions on complex issues.

Tacitus Kilgore

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

No, saying that it's a stepping stone toward forced taking of hormone blockers by all teens is the horseshīt - hysterical horseshīt of the highest order. You're not going to see that, I'm not going to change your mind but I'm sure as shīt going to point it out.

Cool, so being tolerant of someone's right to define themselves is now seen as tacit support of some undefined future "issues". Care to define any others? I'm sure I can try offer my views, they won't be based on hysteria though so might not be the right flavour.

You really do like that word, don't you?

We're talking about the introduction of drugs into a teenage body with little idea of the long-term effects (both mind/body), never mind, the danger of encouraging the Trans idea among teenagers, again, with little idea of the long-term side effects, or dangers involved. That's not being hysterical. It's being rational.

But sure. We're not going to agree on this, but drop the hysterical BS. Fine, disagree with me(I'm grand with differing opinions), but don't throw around that kind of rubbish. You make yourself sound entirely "woke" by putting down those who disagree with you.

99nsr125

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

An interesting “conundrum”, alright. Would all come down to attraction, really.

Raises another question on whether you’d think it was gay to have sex with a fully transitioned male to female, with a brand new gash, breasts and face or if you were to bum a fully transitioned female to male who’s got new “junk”, balls and all, and a beard?

Which do you think you’d pick? Gun to your head like? And which would you “consider” to be gay?

It would be technically both

Snickers Man

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Why are you calling it a murder so? :pac:

Badaboom!!!

Ash.J.Williams

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You really do like that word, don't you?

We're talking about the introduction of drugs into a teenage body with little idea of the long-term effects (both mind/body), never mind, the danger of encouraging the Trans idea among teenagers, again, with little idea of the long-term side effects, or dangers involved. That's not being hysterical. It's being rational.

But sure. We're not going to agree on this, but drop the hysterical BS. Fine, disagree with me(I'm grand with differing opinions), but don't throw around that kind of rubbish. You make yourself sound entirely "woke" by putting down those who disagree with you.

It’s like letting your 11 year old get a tatoo of Ariana grande on his / her face , might regret it in their 40s if they live that long

AllForIt

Sir Oxman wrote: »

I understand you dumping that there because there just are no words. Good grief.

Kivaro

BBC's Match of the Day.
They have very limited time to show snippets of all the day's matches, but they make sure that they show millionaire soccer players kneeling at the start of the match, in support of a billion dollar BLM (For Profit) "movement".
Weird. But it is the BBC.

It’s every match they show the kneeling for. If there’s 8 matches on, it’s 8 times you see it. How long is this to go on for does anyone know?

retalivity

Omackeral wrote: »

It’s every match they show the kneeling for. If there’s 8 matches on, it’s 8 times you see it. How long is this to go on for does anyone know?

As long as it takes for you to stop being a fascist dammit

Dr. Bre

Omackeral wrote: »

It’s every match they show the kneeling for. If there’s 8 matches on, it’s 8 times you see it. How long is this to go on for does anyone know?

Until people just get bored of it. So hopefully soon

gozunda

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Until people just get bored of it. So hopefully soon

Somewhere around 2050.

Kid:
Daddy - why are those guys getting down on one knee at the start of the match?

Father.

You know what - I've really no idea....

ExMachina1000

People argue online about if the Transformers are transgender.

Lads they are fictional robot characters.

EmmetSpiceland

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

People argue online about if the Transformers are transgender.

Lads they are fictional robot characters.

Funny how fictional isn’t an “issue” when it comes to a person of colour playing the part.

Urquell

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

People argue online about if the Transformers are transgender.

Lads they are fictional robot characters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GclFK8XmuNk

ExMachina1000

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Funny how fictional isn’t an “issue” when it comes to a person of colour playing the part.

Sure Jesus is portrayed as being white. He was from the middle east.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Sure Jesus is portrayed as being white. He was from the middle east.

There's already a black Jesus out there. There's also a brown/tanned one too. Just depends which cultural group you belong to, and your particular faith.

ExMachina1000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's already a black Jesus out there. There's also a brown/tanned one too. Just depends which cultural group you belong to, and your particular faith.

Theres a black jesus on family guy.

Haven't seen anyone chance a white mohammed yet.

Antares35

biko wrote: »

If something like this gains traction things could go pear-shaped big time.

FFS

COVID

Deleted User wrote: »

There's already a black Jesus out there. There's also a brown/tanned one too. Just depends which cultural group you belong to, and your particular faith.

True enough, he plays for Man City.

sbsquarepants

Urquell wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GclFK8XmuNk

I would also like to make it clear that it's the ladies who get my square pants stirring:D

Urquell

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I would also like to make it clear that it's the ladies who get my square pants stirring:D

We try not to sexualize annie Spongebob

Stevieluvsye

Omackeral wrote: »

It’s every match they show the kneeling for. If there’s 8 matches on, it’s 8 times you see it. How long is this to go on for does anyone know?

See this is it. Was watching the big bash league the other morning and the players took the knee and the commentator said the "players showing a moment of respect"

Ye wha?

And what is it with this fist black people do? Am i racist for questioning it?

Or maybe i am after being called one by an African lady in lidls because i pulled her up on skipping the queue.

Feisar

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

See this is it. Was watching the big bash league the other morning and the players took the knee and the commentator said the "players showing a moment of respect"

Ye wha?

And what is it with this fist black people do? Am i racist for questioning it?

Or maybe i am after being called one by an African lady in lidls because i pulled her up on skipping the queue.

It's a fairly universal symbol of solidarity/resistance.