Lurker > BeerOnTap

adjl posted...

That would be because your "honest discussion" consists of "I think I know better than doctors how to treat gender dysphoria and I don't care how many people die because of my opinion and my inflated sense of self-importance."

There's no such thing as "trans ideology." The only "ideology" at play is "we should treat people who are sick with what we currently understand to be the best available treatment." Nobody objects to that. Those who object to trans people do so entirely because they're transphobic dongmoogles. They can hide it behind as many layers of "think of the children!" as they want, but 100% of that boils down to the simple fact that they don't like trans people and are afraid of anything that might result in more of them (especially if their kid ends up being "converted"). That fucking kills people. Trying to hide all mention of gender identity or block gender-affirming care does not stop trans people from existing. It just stops them from coming out of the closet and getting the care they need to treat their gender dysphoria, which has horrific consequences for their mental health and is one of the major reasons suicide rates are so astronomically high among trans people (35-50% attempt rate, depending on where they are, with more transphobic regions having a higher rate).

There is no "honest conversation about trans ideology." There's just a bunch of transphobic doogiemuggins thinking their ignorant prejudice deserves a spot at the table with actual science and medicine and evidence-based analyses of what actually helps people and yields the best health outcomes. It doesn't. You're not helping, and neither are any of those other millions of "normal people with kids" that think transphobia constitutes competent parenting because Fox News told them it does. Fuck off and let science do its goddamn job.

If you have concerns that you feel are legitimate because you genuinely don't understand the issue, frame them as such: Asking for clarification on a subject you don't understand. People don't get modded for asking questions about gender dysphoria and transgenderism in a good faith effort to educate themselves. If you're getting modded, it's because you're expressing your opinion not as a genuine effort to learn about the issue, but rather in a way that seeks to invalidate an entire minority that's currently the GOP's punching bag.

Yes weve all heard the official GameFaqs echo chamber talking points ad nauseam. Again, I cant weigh in because its simply not allowed. This site has taken a subjective stance on the matter and wont allow any discussion that challenges it. All I can say is that there are plenty of doctors who would disagree. The pushback is real, and its brewing (pun intended) quickly.
Enjoy your safe-space.

The bottom line is that this has indeed hurt Bud Lights brand. They made the bed, now theyre sleeping in it.

FYI, Target is next. If they have a similar outcome, I cant wait to see how you cope on that one. Will you declare that only country bumpkins shopped at Target? Lol so ridiculous.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


This topic is chock-full of people discarding objective reality in favor of propping up their subjective feelings, and youre saying Im wrong? Thats rich.

Ive already laid it out, Bud Light is taking a major hit. If it helps you cope by declaring that the millions of people who dont agree with what Bud Light chose to do are hillbillies and banjo-plucking rednecks, have at it. This Buds for you!

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/4/0/AAZgfvAAEfBY.jpg
holdthisL.jpg

Conner4REAL posted...

Basically bud lights core customer base is intolerant rednecks.

so they started a marketing campaign that was probably aimed at getting younger more tolerant people into drinking their beer. (Or beer in general) that uses a trans person as a marketing strategy.

naturally their bigoted core audience cares less about their product than the marketing on the can/bottle/cardboard packaging.

edit- maybe they should do diff marketing by region. You know some buck toothed pick up truck cartoonish redneck stereotype playing the banjo in regions that make up the demographic of their core audience and the trans marketing everywhere else.

This comment showcases just how out of touch you are. Youve entrenched yourself into a dome of thought where your incoherent ramblings are enthusiastically affirmed.

Bud Light is suffering because there are millions upon millions of Americans who disagree with what they did. Theyre not all country bumpkins. There are a lot of normal people with kids who dont like this stuff.

Im not allowed to go any further into the specifics of this discussion because the mods here will suspend me if I have an honest conversation about trans ideology.

Again, thought dome. Im glad youre having fun though!

ConfusedTorchic posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/0/1/AAeEKDAAEd1x.png

that little dip is all the boycott managed to achieve lol

Youre absolutely mind boggling. I replied directly to you earlier and showcased how you were objectively incorrect. And yet you doubled down on it. So bizarre.

Instead of a link, Ill do a pic for you this time. Maybe youll get it? But I wont hold my breath.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/9/AAZgfvAAEe7H.jpg
cope.jpg

So it seems there are several folks here who are indeed out of the loop a little.

GRTooCool posted...

All I have to say is that the far right cult members that are "boycotting" Bud Light are still buying other beers, made by the same company. They whine about cancel culture yet they do the same. They're idiots through and through.

This is simply not true. AB stock was just downgraded by a major bank, HSBC. Carlos Laboy of HSBC did not mince words when he wrote about this decision.

Moreover, while Bud Light itself has seen a 23% drop in sales, the entire AB beverage portfolio has also taken a hit.

The controversy appears to be taking its toll on other brands within the Anheuser-Busch umbrella.
The companys flagship Budweiser brand took an 11.4% sales hit for the week ended April 29. Sales of Buds Michelob Ultra brand the third-biggest-selling in the US behind No. 1 Bud Light and No. 2 Modelo Especial were down 4.4%, according to Bump Williams data.
Its not just a Bud Light issue, said Bump Williams, chief executive of the consultancy Its an Anheuser-Busch portfolio problem now.

ConfusedTorchic posted...

ab stock has trended upwards through the whole "boycott"

it did literally nothing to them

Again, this is incorrect. For a while, the stock did stay strong, sure. But this is likely due to people buying the dip and assuming this wont last. It started trending downward this week, but when the report from HSBC came out yesterday, it really took a nosedive:

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/bud

Also one must keep in mind that AB/BudLight have not had to issue their quarterly earnings report so far during this controversy. I think thatll come
in June if Im not mistaken, but I could be wrong on that. Anyway, once they issue their earnings report, itll be an absolute catastrophe. Traders will dump the stock rapidly.

ReturnOfFa posted...

You should show your friend the video of Crowder being a fucking asshole to his (now ex) wife while she's 8 months pregnant.

Its hard to watch. Its that bad. I dont care what someone has going on in their life. The way he treats his pregnant wife here is despicable.

Saying that men cant get pregnant is insensitive to the trans community. This topic is literally transphobic.

Jen0125 posted...

You don't remain consistent though. You specifically call out the left in your topics and posts. You never proactively call out the right. Then when someone points out your inconsistency you feign like you hold the same standards when you clearly don't lol.

For someone who says Im not gonna read the rest of your comment, you sure are thoroughly reading all of my comments.

The reality here is youre a hard-left partisan but you dont want to have to face that realization.
Youre easily one the most dishonest people on this site.

SwollenColon posted...

Beer is also ignoring the fact that Sotomayor disclosed her earnings. It was public knowledge. Thomas hid his dealings. The two cases aren't even on the same planet ethics-wise

Also, Gorsuch had a book deal and didn't recuse, either. Wonder why Beer isn't crying about that one

Gorsuch had a book deal and sat on a case that directly involved the publishing company as a participant in said case? I didnt know this, and Id be interested in a source. And if true, thats definitely not good at all and should be investigated.

Its amazing that you guys keep trying to use half-baked whataboutisms and yet I remain consistent and objective each time. I sadly cant say the same for you.

In summary, it is BAD for any judge to oversee a case where they have a business relationship with one of the participating parties. Its awful. No matter who it is.

Jen0125 posted...

It's very clear he violated ethics and decorum to anyone with ethics and morals. I'm not reading the rest of your right wing fellating.

So its okay for a judge to not recuse herself from a case in which she received millions of dollars from one of the involved parties?

Jen0125 posted...

Absolutely fucking not lmao

Receiving money as part of a contract to write a book is not nearly as egregious as allowing a right wing billionaire to buy your mother's house while she lives in it and pay for your grand nephew you raise as your own son to go to private school when you could afford both those things yourself. Do you think that man did those things out of the kindness of his heart?

So far its not clear that Thomas violated any law or decorum. But, and please stick with me on this, he very well may have. And it should be investigated. See? An objective take.

Sotomayor sat on a case from a company who basically employed her. This is a violation of the procedures of the court. It may be a violation of law.

Now Im doubtful Ill get any honesty from you on this, so let me try it another way: if you, Jen, were having a case tried in court against a company, and the Judge of your trial had worked for said company, and been paid a couple million dollars for his/her work, wouldnt you have a problem with that?

Im eager to hear your answer on this one.

Zareth posted...

Projection. They worship Trump so we must worship Biden.

I havent said anything at all to worship Trump. In fact I said that it seems evident his kids have done similar shady deals and Id like to see it fully investigated. Meanwhile, folks on your side have pretty much refused to be objective on the Biden family receiving money through phony shell companies, desperate to showcase their blind allegiance to the party.

This is a major reach, and a dishonest one at that.

ReturnOfFa posted...

Comparing Sonia Sotomayor to Clarence Thomas is also not proportional. You're acting like she received a bribe from Penguin House.

Not once did I use the word bribe to describe the situation. All I said was she received a boatload of cash, and she did indeed.

You can take issue with whether or not she recussed (sic) herself from Aaron Greenspan v. Random House

Thats literally the point I made. Thats it.
So Ill ask, do you take issue with her not recusing herself?

And when it comes to Thomas, he didnt rule on, nor participate in, any case involving the folks who gave him gifts. As much as you dont want to acknowledge it, it is way less severe when compared to what Sotomayor has done.

Cacciato posted...

What a fucking surprise

Youve not actually weighed in on anything here pertaining to the topic at hand, that the Biden family set up phony shell companies to take in millions in bribe money from foreign nations. So I can safely assume youve read next to nothing here as well.

Nah I didnt read just assumed you were replying to me. My mistake indeed.

ConfusedTorchic posted...

probably because you repeatedly and constantly post alt right extremist views.

I rarely post here. Youre lying. And just because you label something doesnt make it so.

Ozmose posted...

You can forget getting anything worthwhile out of him. If you're not directly echoing his worldview back at him, you're just gonna get called every buzzword in the book. I never even voted for Trump and he still calls me a MAGA alt-right republican extremist every chance he gets.

This tactic seems common here. Its quite sad really.

Jen0125 posted...

Why would I read your replies when you're extremely brainwashed by white supremacist right wing rhetoric lol

ReturnOfFa posted...

bro it isn't 7 years ago

Ironically this is literally from 30 years ago. Sooo..

Jen0125 posted...

Why would I read your replies when you're extremely brainwashed by white supremacist right wing rhetoric lol

A very childish retort.

MeatiestMeatus posted...

You'd know what I was talking about if you got your news from a source that doesn't cater to the willfully ignorant MAGA crowd this has been reported on since at least March lmao Dailywire is such a fucking joke of a "news" agency

Hit us with the source bud.

It still is a story about something that broke TODAY. This committee released their findings from an investigation. I genuinely dont get why youre failing to understand this. Youre not making sense.

Jen0125 posted...

Surely OP is as outraged at the Trump family enrichment while he was in office?

This was already addressed in my first reply, which it seems you did not read. Yes, it does seem apparent the Trump kids enriched themselves in some shady stuff. I dont like that one bit. Id like to see it fully investigated.

See? Objectivity. Would you care to try it? Would you like to go on record and condemn Joe and his family for this? Because your attempt at whataboutism backfired.

MeatiestMeatus posted...

lmao this news is like two months old where the fuck has Dailywire been? What a fucking dumb source how does anyone rely on Dailywire for information it's run by morons

Perhaps this has been suspected for a while now, but this committee just laid out their findings from their lengthy investigation today. What are you even talking about?

ReturnOfFa posted...

Will they be interested in similar cases on their own side?

Probably not. Like for example, it seems that there is evidence Trumps kids did some similar crap, and I dont see them going after that. But the same can be said about Democrats: for example, theyre investigating Clarence Thomas for supposedly taking money/gifts improperly, and yet Justice Sonia Sotomayor took a boatload of cash from a publishing company, and then did not recuse herself from a case they were involved in, but rather directly ruled on it. Thats way worse.

Sadly we all know politicians on both sides are partisan and willing to ignore bad actors on their own team. Thats why its up to the citizenry to be objective and call it all out as we see it. Regardless of if theyre on your team or not.

I hope we can all agree that taking bribes from an abhorrent enemy nation (Communist China) is really bad.

when Is the season? Im gonna try it this year!

https://www.dailywire.com/news/house-republicans-lay-out-damning-case-of-biden-familys-alleged-corruption

Interesting indeed.

Its an accepted term in the English language with an objective meaning, despite the constant barrage of attempts as of late to diminish its meaning.