Lurker > ImmatureContent

shockthemonkey posted...

People seem obsessed with announcing and justifying why theyd never date a trans person.

Its suspect at best.

Definitely this. People rarely get so defensive when they are actually secure about their position. They are trying to convince themselves as much as anyone.
---

NinjaMaster

Fighting for change isn't necessarily about changing people's minds. Most people have their minds more or less made up. It is about changing the system so that future people do not have their minds affected by the system in the same way.
---

NinjaMaster

DarkProto05 posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

im not 13 posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

This is complete bullshit. If you attracted to someone, you are attracted to them. Changing your mind after you find out they are trans is 100% due to prejudice. It is not about them. It is about you.

ITP: Genitals don't matter.

That is an interesting take away considering my post had nothing to do with genitals.

People are attracted to people. People aren't specifically attracted to genitals... unless they have some sort of weird kink. You can be attracted to someone that you don't want to date. Claiming you aren't attracted to them is bullshit, though. And if the reason you don't want to date someone is based on them being a member of a specific class of people, it would fall under the definition of prejudice.

Not wanting to date someone because you want biological children can be a valid reason. But this also applies to cis females. Not all cis females are capable of having children. But no one goes around claiming they aren't attracted to women that can't have children, because that would be silly.

If I can't tell that a woman is trans because every part of her looks so real and she's post-op, I'd have no problem dating her (even if I found out she's trans). But if she's pre-op, looks just like a woman, and when we finally get naked she has a penis that would be a big problem. How the fuck can you not see that's a big problem to a straight male? Oh because you aren't one so don't judge us.

Who said I was judging anyone? I am pointing out the prejudices that people hold. I am not saying you are a bad person for having prejudices. But when people ignore prejudices, nothing will ever change. Also, how do you know I am not a straight male? I was raised as a straight male. I thought of myself as such for quite a large portion of my life. I think that qualifies me to understand the straight male point of view pretty well.
---

NinjaMaster

im not 13 posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

That is an interesting take away considering my post had nothing to do with genitals.

People are attracted to people. People aren't specifically attracted to genitals... unless they have some sort of weird kink. You can be attracted to someone that you don't want to date. Claiming you aren't attracted to them is bullshit, though. And if the reason you don't want to date someone is based on them being a member of a specific class of people, it would fall under the definition of prejudice.

Not wanting to date someone because you want biological children can be a valid reason. But this also applies to cis females. Not all cis females are capable of having children. But no one goes around claiming they aren't attracted to women that can't have children, because that would be silly.

ITP: People aren't attracted to boobs, dick size, asses, shaved/unshaved cootch.

You are generalising way to much to prove your point. Stop it.

And you aren't even making a point. You are just posting gibberish and not responding to my point.
---

NinjaMaster

im not 13 posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

This is complete bullshit. If you attracted to someone, you are attracted to them. Changing your mind after you find out they are trans is 100% due to prejudice. It is not about them. It is about you.

ITP: Genitals don't matter.

That is an interesting take away considering my post had nothing to do with genitals.

People are attracted to people. People aren't specifically attracted to genitals... unless they have some sort of weird kink. You can be attracted to someone that you don't want to date. Claiming you aren't attracted to them is bullshit, though. And if the reason you don't want to date someone is based on them being a member of a specific class of people, it would fall under the definition of prejudice.

Not wanting to date someone because you want biological children can be a valid reason. But this also applies to cis females. Not all cis females are capable of having children. But no one goes around claiming they aren't attracted to women that can't have children, because that would be silly.
---

NinjaMaster

NonDairyMiltank posted...

whether or not you agree with Blaire White, you're not going to get very far tryin to socially strongarm people into dating partners they ain't into

"oh but you wanted me before you knew i was trans" =/= actually attracted to you

it means they were attracted to what they THOUGHT you were
BIG difference...

if you wanna identify as a different gender than what you were born as, more power to you
just remember that not everyone you try to date is gonna agree with your assessment and thats just how it has to be

This is complete bullshit. If you attracted to someone, you are attracted to them. Changing your mind after you find out they are trans is 100% due to prejudice. It is not about them. It is about you.
---

NinjaMaster

ssjevot posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

And no, the argument that animals have feelings or a desire to live is irrelevant. Plants have the same functions.

That's a really weird take, because most people don't consider pain inherently wrong. It's suffering we have an issue with. If you enjoy pain most people don't consider that wrong, it's if someone makes you suffer that people get upset. So if you remove the emotions, such as in a plant, of course people won't have empathy, plants can't suffer.

How exactly do you gauge suffering for organisms when you have no way of communicating with them? Suffering is not a quantifiable phenomenon. How do you know when an animal is suffering? How do you know a plant is not experiencing something equivalent?
---

NinjaMaster

Vegetarians seem to have an arbitrary definition of life. Plants are living organisms. It basically comes down to empathy. People have an easier time empathizing with animals because they are themselves animals. In the end, eating animals is not really any different than eating plants. Either way you are consuming biological matter for sustenance.

And no, the argument that animals have feelings or a desire to live is irrelevant. Plants have the same functions. All life is programmed for survival. If you injure a plant, it attempts to repair the damage the same way an animal heals from wounds. The only difference is we have to take a bigger leap to identify with plant life because it is different from us.
---

NinjaMaster

No reason to be embarrassed. Effort is much more important than ability when it comes to getting in shape.
---

NinjaMaster

Zikten posted...

KillerKhan420 posted...

Dogs can be racist too.

I suppose. they can be sexist too. my parents used to have a Boxer that hated all male humans he didn't know. but it's learned behavior. Its not coming from the same place as human racism. either someone black abused the dog once (I think the article was implying the church claimed that) or the priest taught his dog to hate black people. but either way, the dog isn't racist in the way a human is. they can't be. if they do treat black people differently, it's cause they somehow learned that. not that they on their own decided to hate them

Humans learn racism also. They don't just decide to be racist on their own. The difference is humans (some of them) are smart enough to question the things they learn which allows them to potentially change their mind.
---

NinjaMaster

I am more honest on the Internet than in real life.
---

NinjaMaster

FrozenXylophone posted...

In any case, there are metrics you might call a shared belief because even among a diverse group who may not even identify as atheist, certain metrics top 70%

https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-family/atheist/

That means that you can group them in a statistically significant way at the very least.

And those shared metrics support the notion that atheists tend to be more left-wing. Not really helping your case, in any event.
---

NinjaMaster

Atheism isn't a belief system and atheists have no shared opinions. Atheism isn't even an actual thing. The term only exists because of religion. This is an absurd connection and has no relevance whatsoever.
---

NinjaMaster

What is the upside of an erection without the possibility of sexual activity?
---

NinjaMaster

I imagine a large percentage of us experience varying degrees of apathy.
---

NinjaMaster

No_U_L7 posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

lol you literally had an emotional response to being called a fake pick up artist.

it was a factual response to highlight the difference between me and the poster

Whether it is a fact or not is irrelevant to it being an emotional response. Your need for attention and constant clarification of your status as a pick up artist is deeply rooted in emotion. People without emotion would have no need for extraneous interaction with others, like posting on a message board. Everyone posting here has emotions.
---

NinjaMaster

No_U_L7 posted...

NOM posted...

Same here, except Im not a fake pick up artist or whatever.

Being emotionless sucks though. Makes you start to wonder why youre even alive if you can never feel any kind of joy or happiness.

The only time I feel anything is anxiety over my job or sadness that Im such wasted DNA. Otherwise Im numb.

i'm not a fake pick up artist either

so at least i get girls and i'm successful in my career...but i still feel next to nothing

lol you literally had an emotional response to being called a fake pick up artist.
---

NinjaMaster

Technically, just about anything can be art. But to call games an art form, I'd say not really applicable most of the time.
---

NinjaMaster

I can definitely call people things. I can call someone a liberal or a conservative. I can call people American. I can call people sports fans. I can call people gamers. Calling someone something isn't flaming. It is all up to the interpretation of the moderator.
---

NinjaMaster

What if you call someone an instigator? Is that flaming? Means essentially the same thing as troll but it doesn't carry the same negative connotation.
---

NinjaMaster

CosmicShadows posted...

How about making artificial rain? <_<

https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/manufacture-water.htm
---

NinjaMaster

Where do you think rain comes from... outer space?
---

NinjaMaster

I don't watch movies if I expect to dislike them.
---

NinjaMaster

I think I ended up lowering the difficulty in Gears of War at General Raam. I got annoyed and just wanted to get it over with after he killed me a few times.
---

NinjaMaster

Lost_All_Senses posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

There isn't a soulmate for any of us. That is just sentimentality. Everyone settles. No two people are perfect matches. Anyone that thinks they found their soulmate is wrong and you could have the same bond with someone else under the right circumstances.

Not everyone settles. You're assuming everyone has unrealistic/ridiculous standards. Some people have good self awareness and don't feel like they're settling because the person isn't perfect in every way they want. You only feel like you're settling if you point out all their faults and ignore your own

Settling carries negative connotations with it but I didn't really mean it that way. The point is that no two people are specifically meant for each other. You aren't going to find someone that is perfect. It doesn't exist. So, we all pick someone that is the best fit we can find.
---

NinjaMaster

biggernails posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

biggernails posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

biggernails posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

FPS and open world are not comparable. Open world is an evolution of gaming. It is not a genre.

thats gonna be a yikes from me dawg

yikes is meaningless drivel. Maybe respond with an actual thought.

you consider open world an evolution gaming? thats a deluded and pathetic sentiment imo

The reason games previously had smaller confines is due to the lack of technology. As the technology advanced, games became bigger and allowed you more freedom. How is that a genre? Almost any kind of game can have an open world concept. And due to it being a popular idea, many games have adapted to include it to some extent. It is like RPG elements such as leveling up or gaining new skills being included in most games nowadays. The popular aspects from old games being adopted into new games. Sounds like evolution to me.

the way you describe it sounds like you think open world is the end all be all de facto gaming experience when I dont feel that way

I am saying that is not a fad and it isn't going away. Why would games go backwards and limit your freedom by putting you into linear levels again? That is not going to happen. Maybe a few games will do it but they will be a niche part of retro gaming. How exactly do you feel?
---

NinjaMaster

biggernails posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

biggernails posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

FPS and open world are not comparable. Open world is an evolution of gaming. It is not a genre.

thats gonna be a yikes from me dawg

yikes is meaningless drivel. Maybe respond with an actual thought.

you consider open world an evolution gaming? thats a deluded and pathetic sentiment imo

The reason games previously had smaller confines is due to the lack of technology. As the technology advanced, games became bigger and allowed you more freedom. How is that a genre? Almost any kind of game can have an open world concept. And due to it being a popular idea, many games have adapted to include it to some extent. It is like RPG elements such as leveling up or gaining new skills being included in most games nowadays. The popular aspects from old games being adopted into new games. Sounds like evolution to me.
---

NinjaMaster

biggernails posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

FPS and open world are not comparable. Open world is an evolution of gaming. It is not a genre.

thats gonna be a yikes from me dawg

yikes is meaningless drivel. Maybe respond with an actual thought.
---

NinjaMaster

FPS and open world are not comparable. Open world is an evolution of gaming. It is not a genre.
---

NinjaMaster

There isn't a soulmate for any of us. That is just sentimentality. Everyone settles. No two people are perfect matches. Anyone that thinks they found their soulmate is wrong and you could have the same bond with someone else under the right circumstances.
---

NinjaMaster

Mickey Rourke is probably the worst villain in the MCU.
---

NinjaMaster

Flagellation
---

NinjaMaster

If the rhythm feels good to you baby
Let me hear you say oh oh baby
---

NinjaMaster

clearaflagrantj posted...

ImmatureContent posted...

The US is still a democracy. Why would we need a revolution to change the government when we can simply vote for new officials? Revolution wouldn't fix anything

God imagine being this naive. Our country is a corporate oligarchy branded as democracy. Our lawmakers work in favor of the rich fucks who bought them out. The entire fucking system is corrupt and it needs to be ripped out of the soil, roots and all

lol
And that is the only response you deserve.
---

NinjaMaster

The US is still a democracy. Why would we need a revolution to change the government when we can simply vote for new officials? Revolution wouldn't fix anything. A more likely(but still unlikely) scenario is civil war. The citizenry do not all agree with each other. The reason you have a problem with the government is because it is disjointed and tries to represent two different ideologies at the same time. Both sides hate the influence the other side has on policy.
---

NinjaMaster

Move to Canada.
---

NinjaMaster

I think gun owners should be required to have a license to own and operate firearms.
---

NinjaMaster

Scotty_Rogers posted...

Ma'am isn't the female counterpart to Sir. I believe that's Dame.

Sir and dame are titles. Sir is also used in a less official capacity and in those cases madam is the female counterpart. Ma'am is the contraction for madam.
---

NinjaMaster

YourDrunkFather posted...

Why do people still respond to gunplagirl

Coming from you, I find this hilarious.
---

NinjaMaster

People could always go into whichever bathroom they wanted. No one fucking monitored it in the past. This has never been about safety. It was always about prejudice. As a resident of North Carolina, I am glad the federal court stepped in and set this shit straight. This doesn't suddenly make assault okay. It is not like you can go into the bathroom and assault someone now.
---

NinjaMaster

My sense of humor is offended.
---

NinjaMaster

I have never been called racist. I have been called the n-word by multiple people, though. I find this scenario of being falsely accused of racism highly suspect. It might happen but it is not prevalent enough to be an issue. To me, this just sounds like deflection from racism being an actual problem.
---

NinjaMaster

Too politically charged nowadays. Sure, people got into arguments back then but it felt like that stuff was more contained in one or two topics instead of all over the place. Also, I was no doubt a different person then. I am now older and probably more cynical.
---

NinjaMaster

LordRazziel posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

Short term = alt right
Long term = extreme left

Both need to some discipline

What makes you say the extreme left are a bigger threat in the long term?

The fact that he is an outspoken right-winger.

History proves that the left wins. Compare today with any point in history and we are more left leaning now than we were then. A hundred years ago, it would have been far left thinking to accept homosexuality as normal. It is not dangerous. It is progress. But the right combats progress because it makes them uncomfortable. They are incapable of adapting and they stubbornly hold onto the things that are familiar to them.
---

NinjaMaster

She wasn't a threat. She was just being insubordinate. Definitely excessive force.
---

NinjaMaster

Spitting on someone is almost entirely harmless. It is a symbolic act of disrespect. If you think being disrespected requires that sort of retaliation, you have an excessive amount of pride and/or anger management issues. I wasn't remotely defending the spitter in my original post, but the people in this topic being so fucking adamant that it wasn't an overreaction are ridiculous.

What if the dude's girlfriend spits on him in an argument? Would you guys be saying it is alright for him to beat the shit out of her?
---

NinjaMaster

Animals are capable of emotion. Humans are animals. We are not special. Ironically, it is the least exceptional humans that always seem to be so sure they are special.
---

NinjaMaster