Lurker > Tenlaar

Tyranthraxus posted...

Nope. They are literally inspecting girls for penises in order to participate at school sports. No amount of dressing this shit up as a normal physical will change that.

Who is they? Requiring a note from a doctor is very clearly not the same thing as a school performing genital inspections. You are lying to make it seem molester-y.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Okay man use your brain here this is about physical exams in which a doctor must confirm the student's genitals. This isn't a fucking void in which all things said have no context.

So what youre saying is that this topic you made is a lie.

R1masher posted...

what does that even mean?

What part is confusing to you? Putting on a costume doesnt change or define somebodys sexuality or gender identity. Not when a woman plays Peter Pan, not when voice actors play characters that identify differently than the voice actor, and not when somebody does a drag performance.

alfred_ashford posted...

Idk, queer or maybe question as they do not know what they are? But beig a Drag Queen would def fall under the modern day definition of queer I would think hey?

No. Drag is a style of performance, not a sexuality or gender identity.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Meanwhile in the rest of the fucking normal world I don't need a letter from a doctor to play high school sports

Yeah? That doesnt make it okay for you to full on lie about things and make penis inspection day at school topics. Stop lying.

Every single one of these bills that people make topics like this about has required a verification letter from the childs doctor. Criticize it for what it actually is, not this same kind of pedo panic bullshit lying that right wingers do.

Tyranthraxus posted...

If you have a straight man in drag, that's just a transvestite.

Not when its for the purpose of performance rather than something that they regularly do in day to day life.

Probably the Redwood forests in Northern California.

Not if theyre a straight cis person, obviously. That would be pretty stupid. Putting on a costume doesnt change somebodys sexual orientation or gender identity.

I lived in an 87 Blazer for a while. Im currently saving up to buy a step van to convert into a mobile home.

How many times have you made this thread now?

I usually lean more into the tofu and legumes but there are some pretty good fake meat things now. Gardein is the best big brand I think. Nuggets, brats, the ultimate veggie burger. Tofurkey Italian sausage is one I really like too.

A_Good_Boy posted...

I'm assumingAnd I'm assuming

Thats cool, but whatever you assume isnt going to make protestors for one side justified in assaulting protestors for the other side over words or being where they dont belong. And since we are now at the point where you are filling in details from your imagination its probably not very productive to continue down this path.

A_Good_Boy posted...

I'm assuming it works in Canada the same as the US and these events in public spaces are required to have a permit before they can assemble. Seeing as how in the video I posted you can see tons of people with trans flags with police standing by suggests that those people had a permit to be in that location. Billboard Chris and his buddy probably didn't, so presumably they were required to stand back at least 100 feet from the people that had the permit, yet they plopped down right in the midst of them and tried to conduct a bullshit interview while standing where they weren't welcome or permitted. It's probably why the cops insist that this dude instigated the fight and arrested him instead of the woman that beat his ass because that was a situation he created in the first place by being where he wasn't permitted.

A group demonstration requires a permit, a person does not. And I have never heard of anything remotely like people having a permit giving them some legal control over a public space like you are acting like they would have. And even if they did, that wouldnt give them some legal protection to assault somebody, only to have them removed by police.

They were somewhere they didnt belong so its their fault they got assaulted is a completely bullshit justification when people are in public spaces.

AceMos posted...

i love how tenlar likes to pretend he is left wing but always goes to bat for right wing assholes

That is a flat out lie. Im sorry that somebody being consistent in their beliefs is such a hard thing for you to understand but I dont base my positions about these kinds of things on which party I agree with politically like you do.

I didnt. I didnt know what it was for a long time but now I do and I am living it.

greenjeans posted...

I'm sorry you seem to suffer from a short temper thus making you side with the like-minded individual.

I am not like minded to the bigot, please dont lie about me. This is just not a thing that is up for debate. What the woman was doing is assault, period.

greenjeans posted...

Yeah, that's what the girl was doing

Factually, inarguably incorrect. There is video of her assaulting him.

NOMA and City Park are nice, sculpture garden and what not, but not so much NOLA specific. If youll be there on a Sunday night the regular band at Mother In Law is a good time, I think they start at 9. Ill second Commanders. Ajun Cajun is a place I like too. Cajun Mikes is a little hole in the wall bar with great food as well, get the boudin balls.

A_Good_Boy posted...

So she assaulted him and he committed battery against her?

Somebody being assaulted and trying to stop the assault is not battery, its self defense.

pauIie posted...

so that's a no. got it.

Nope. Thats a its already been explained in this very topic.

pauIie posted...

timestamp?

Im not really interested in the I dont know the difference between assault and battery routine. Its played out enough in this topic already.

pauIie posted...

she was assaulting him?

Yes.

pauIie posted...

doesn't matter. she's supposed to wait and figure out what this dude is about to do after he grabs her by the collar? nah.

in this scenario, if you grab me by the collar, you're getting a justifiably hostile response.

If you were in the act of assaulting somebody you wouldnt be justified in attacking them for trying to stop you. You cant claim self defense against somebody trying to stop your hostility.

CyricZ posted...

"Isn't it a good thing that an inner city kids' support program is being established, even though it excludes black kids? Do you think it would be better for that program to not exist?"

Answer the question. Would you prefer a support program for cis women who have been raped cannot exist because they dont agree with your view that trans women need to be included regardless of how it may affect the cis women?

You still haven't answered why you're in this topic. Why this little nit to pick is so important to you. I don't buy "inconsistent logic exists on the Internet and I must correct it". You're too fucking emotional for that to pass.

I have told you why, I dont care if you want to pretend there has to be some bigoted ulterior motive at play. Making up things like how emotional I must be is pointless troll shit. If you dont want to talk about what I posted about then dont reply to it.

pauIie posted...

grabbing someone by the collar isn't my standard procedure of peacefully getting someone out of my personal space

Is your assertion that he was trying to hold her in place rather than trying to push her away? What do you believe he was about to do?

Thats pretty normal, our voices sound different to us in our own heads than what they sound like to everybody else so it seems wrong when we hear it in a recording.

I do not believe a single one of you would just stand there with somebody body to body with you and screaming in your face and think Well gee, I have no right to try to move this person out of my personal space. Better just stand here and accept it.

CyricZ posted...

Fine, you disagree with the idea that fostering an exclusory culture of trans women being "not women" isn't harmful. Good for you on that one.

But I don't think you get to say that and not have people draw conclusions about you as a person.

What I disagree with is treating something that could be better but is still ultimately a good thing as something altogether horrible because of shitty views of somebody funding it. Do you think it would be better for that shelter to not exist than to exist and not be as inclusive as you want it to be?

Deteled posted...

So you see no problem with a shelter for young boys not accepting young black boys then?

Because it's more like that than your example.

I would have a problem with that but I dont think I agree that the difference between Black boys and boys of other races is analogous to the difference between cis and trans people. And that goes back to what I said about the apparent inconsistency in which some of these things are applied, because there are many organizations that are solely to support a single race just as there are many that are to solely to support one sex/gender/orientation/etc.

How is a crate full of things one thing but a building full of things isnt one thing?

Luckily you can choose not to watch it.

CyricZ posted...

Then why are you here, Tenlaar. Why are you in this topic having this argument.

What possessed you to think all this was a good idea?

I just don't get you man.

Some of you keep using funding a shelter for cis women as an example of some vile thing that is causing harm to trans women. I disagree with that assessment and the inconsistent application of the criticism of demographic specific programs. Its not very complicated and I really dont care how smug you want to be about it, like even trying to discuss it is a sign that somebody is everything you hate. Get over yourself and your belief that anybody needs your approval.

None. Those exist. That's not the problem.

The problem is the shelter in question defining exclusive characteristics in order to classify trans women as "not women".

Like accepting women, but not gay women. Doesn't that sound silly to you?

I have no problem with you disagreeing with their beliefs, but ultimately their beliefs do not change the reality of the situation. Which is that groups focused on supporting very specific demographics are found all over. I find it very hard to believe that you would have the same objections, and make the same statements about what a vile and harmful thing it is, about a shelter for trans people with a founder that feels its safer for trans people not to allow cis people, or a group to support Black children founded by somebody with questionable racial separatist beliefs, and so on.

remandramdoll posted...

Ah yes your pro trans stances such as defending excluding trans women from being counted among women.

I do not and would not defend that at all. Please do not make things up.

CyricZ posted...

With your post being 80% "I'm a good person, honest", let's focus on this:

It was actually you are lying. But sure, lets move on.

The support program, in its exclusion, is causing harm by promoting the idea that trans women lack "womanhood". It reinforces bigoted ideas surrounding whether being trans is "real" or just "deception".

And it decides which women are believed to be "more vulnerable".

There's no inconsistency in the logic applied here.

What would your objections to a support program exclusively for trans women be?

CyricZ posted...

You ever notice how often you have to keep reinforcing how "not a bad person" you are?

Do you ever stop to think about why people think that about you.

I am fully aware that many posters around here, very much including you, are fine with lying about people and making up positions that they hold in order to paint them as bad people and make yourself feel superior. You have been part of plenty of threads where I have expressed support for gender affirming care, supporting trans youth with puberty blockers and social transition, etc. Questioning the inconsistently applied logic about a support program not including trans women causing harm doesnt change any of those pro-trans stances that I have.

CyricZ posted...

Tenlaar really carrying that torch for the Oppression Olympics today.

Shut the fuck up. I question the apparent inconsistent logic behind the claim that a program not including trans women is causing harm to trans women, that doesnt mean I agree with Rowling about trans people or issues. I do not.

Gwynevere posted...

Kind of interesting that you're implying that trans women fall outside of the demographic of women

I do not believe that at all. Trans women and cis women are different demographics of women.

remandramdoll posted...

Because it isn't about them focusing on protecting one group, it is about specifically excluding another.

Am I to believe that you would have the same position about a program to support trans women being harmful to cis women?

remandramdoll posted...

You're just using circular logic, and cyricz nailed the other important thing about your bs

I guess Ill just have take that as you being unable to explain how something focused on supporting one demographic is causing harm to people outside of that demographic.