Current Events > "Unfortunate" doesn't begin to describe this site's moderations

(+) Yeah! (+)

Tyranthraxus posted...

Y'all are spending way too much effort on an obvious joke topic

Nobody is talking about the TCs post. We all acknowledge it was copypasta and other conversations ensued.

WoodenRook posted...

Me either except when they're twisted into something I never said on Gamefaqs.

So in other words, posting something transphobic and then claiming, "That's not transphobic!" for example.

Do you believe trans kids should have access to gender affirming care?

CSCA33 posted...

So in other words, posting something transphobic and then claiming, "That's not transphobic!" for example.

Do you believe trans kids should have access to gender affirming care?

Is that the game now? Trying to pepper me with political questions until I say something inappropriate or twistable?

That's the definition of trolling.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I answered your question directly and you keep ignoring parts of my posts.

I'm not going to go down the list of political opinions until you find something to twist.

WoodenRook posted...

Is that the game now? Trying to pepper me with political questions until I say something inappropriate or twistable?

That's the definition of trolling.

I see you avoided answering the question.

I will unequivocally state I do in fact support gender affirming care for trans kids. This is my sincerely held position. Do you?

WoodenRook posted...

you keep ignoring parts of my posts.

You keep doing this yourself even when called out on it, aren't you supposed to "care about arguing in good faith"?

WoodenRook posted...

I answered your question directly and you keep ignoring parts of my posts.

I'm not going to go down the list of political opinions until you find something to twist.

You dont have to go down the list. Just say an opinion that you feel has led to discrimination against you. That shouldnt be very difficult. If someone twists it you can point that out immediately and prove your point.

Zonbei posted...

You dont have to go down the list. Just say an opinion that you feel has led to discrimination against you. That shouldnt be very difficult. If someone twists it you can point that out immediately and prove your point.

Alright, here's one... It's not very political, but it is relevant.

If an actor has a social media account they use to raise awareness of a film, people should be able to tell them how they feel about their acting even when it's poor. It's not harassment.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Oh, it most certainly was. And this is why you all are arguing in bad faith. No matter what I would post you would respond with that.

WoodenRook posted...

Alright, here's one... It's not very political, but it is relevant.

If an actor has a social media account they use to raise awareness of a film, people should be able to tell them how they feel about their acting even when it's poor. It's not harassment.

Nobody in the history of the planet earth has ever been moderated for espousing that opinion. It also isnt a political opinion, at all, so Im confused as to why you brought it up. But sure: who discriminated against you for this, exactly? Send me a pic of the moderation.

WoodenRook posted...

Alright, here's one... It's not very political, but it is relevant.

If an actor has a social media account they use to raise awareness of a film, people should be able to tell them how they feel about their acting even when it's poor. It's not harassment.

It can definitely verge into harassment depending on how far you go, but for the most part I'd agree.

This definitely isn't the full context though if you did get popped for something along these lines.

So speaking logically, why would you be apprehensive about voicing support for gender affirming care, unless of course you don't support it? This isn't a game or a trick, it's a reasonable position to discuss and an important matter for many. I used it as an example because you want to have a discussion about political "opinions" and yet refuse to elaborate.

WoodenRook posted...

Oh, it most certainly was. And this is why you all are arguing in bad faith. No matter what I would post you would respond with that.

At this point, you are the only one here posting in bad faith. You're welcome to demonstrate otherwise by engaging the discussion.

CSCA33 posted...

So speaking logically, why would you be apprehensive about voicing support for gender affirming care, unless of course you don't support it? This isn't a game or a trick, it's a reasonable position to discuss and an important matter for many. I used it as an example because you want to have a discussion about political "opinions" and yet refuse to elaborate.

I don't support gender affirming care for kids. That was your original question. I do not feel that kids are old enough to make that decision. Even the ones that aren't permanent.

I think if they are being made to feel bad for who they are that it's terrible, but we all have burdens we bear and have to deal with. When they are adults they can do whatever they want.

WoodenRook posted...

I don't support gender affirming care for kids. That was your original question. I do not feel that kids are old enough to make that decision. Even the ones that aren't permanent.

I think if they are being made to feel bad for who they are that it's terrible, but we all have burdens we bear and have to deal with. When they are adults they can do whatever they want.

Now we're getting somewhere.

Kids don't get to make that decision on their own, gender affirming care for children is provided in concert with medical professionals and their parents. Furthermore, gender affirming care for pre-adolescent children involves clothes, pronouns, names, exploring how they express themselves. Medical intervention starts with puberty and informed consent.

Basically all the major medical organizations support gender affirming care using an evidence based approach. Why do you trust them to make recommendations for heart disease or cancer treatments, but not gender affirming care?

CSCA33 posted...

Now we're getting somewhere.

Kids don't get to make that decision on their own, gender affirming care for children is provided in concert with medical professionals and their parents. Furthermore, gender affirming care for pre-adolescent children involves clothes, pronouns, names, exploring how they express themselves. Medical intervention starts with puberty.

Basically all the major medical organizations support gender affirming care. Why do you trust them to make recommendations for heart disease or cancer treatments, but not gender affirming care?

See this is where you get to arguing and trying to convince people. I'm not going to have a political discussion here.

I answered your question.

You think your political view is "right" and that the other opinion is "wrong" and then you're going to twist it into something that is hateful to be moderated.

WoodenRook posted...

I don't support gender affirming care for kids. That was your original question. I do not feel that kids are old enough to make that decision. Even the ones that aren't permanent.

I think if they are being made to feel bad for who they are that it's terrible, but we all have burdens we bear and have to deal with. When they are adults they can do whatever they want.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202201/the-evidence-trans-youth-gender-affirming-medical-care

https://opa.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-08/gender-affirming-care-young-people.pdf

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-the-science-on-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-kids-really-shows/

If you were acting in good faith, you would read these, and then acknowledge reality because your opinion on this is literally wrong.

But look, even though you said this objectively wrong thing, youre not going to get moderated, and no one is insulting you.

WoodenRook posted...

See this is where you get to arguing and trying to convince people. I'm not going to have a political discussion here.

I answered your question.

You think your political view is "right" and that the other opinion is "wrong" and then you're going to twist it into something that is hateful to be moderated.

WoodenRook posted...

See this is where you get to arguing and trying to convince people. I'm not going to have a political discussion here.

I answered your question.

You think your political view is "right" and that the other opinion is "wrong" and then you're going to twist it into something that is hateful to be moderated.

I think that using an evidence based approach to medicine is prudent to improve the quality of life for the population, as well as allowing patients and medical professionals to decide what is best for them without gatekeeping by the government. This isn't so much about what I personally "believe is right."

WoodenRook posted...

See this is where you get to arguing and trying to convince people. I'm not going to have a political discussion here.

I answered your question.

You think your political view is "right" and that the other opinion is "wrong" and then you're going to twist it into something that is hateful to be moderated.

I mean. Your opinion is about as objectively wrong as it can be. Ive provided you information that explains why. If you choose to ignore that information, youre being willfully ignorant.

and yet there still is no way youre being moderated for any of this. So what?

We disagree. It's not hateful and it doesn't deserve to be moderated.

WoodenRook posted...

We disagree. It's not hateful and it doesn't deserve to be moderated.

I haven't reported your post and am trying to have a genuine discussion with you about this.

CSCA33 posted...

I haven't reported your post and am trying to have a genuine discussion with you about this.

I don't want to discuss it and have made that clear.

WoodenRook posted...

We disagree. It's not hateful and it doesn't deserve to be moderated.

You're literally not being moderated for it, and you never would and never have been.

We disagree because one of us is wrong, and its you. Youre arguing in bad faith. You refused to read the information I provided you. Your belief is harmful to children. You still arent being moderated for it.

WoodenRook posted...

I don't want to discuss it and have made that clear.

Why? Why are you so afraid of facts and evidence that might shift your opinion?

Murphiroth posted...

Why? Why are you so afraid of facts and evidence that might shift your opinion?

Because, relevant to this topic, this is not a safe place.

WoodenRook posted...

I don't want to discuss it and have made that clear.

Would you then say this is tangential to your complaint about political "opinions" being unfairly moderated? In other words, this is an example of what you consider a valid opinion being unfairly moderated when people say they don't support gender affirming care for kids.

I can come up with other examples that aren't related to gender affirming care, as well.

CSCA33 posted...

Would you then say this is tangential to your complaint about political "opinions" being unfairly moderated? In other words, this is an example of what you consider a valid opinion being unfairly moderated when people say they don't support gender affirming care for kids.

I can come up with other examples that aren't related to gender affirming care, as well.

That's a good question, and no. I've never been moderated for that topic. You would very much find it tough to find the ones I have been moderated for and the reason I used the Ada Wong VA example was because it's one of the ones I still have in my list.

Holy shit, this topic exists.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/71826191.jpg

WoodenRook posted...

Because, relevant to this topic, this is not a safe place.

Your post about gender affirming care for kids still being up disproves that.

Though it is quite hilarious that you're admitting to refusing to accept new information that might change your viewpoint.

WoodenRook posted...

Because, relevant to this topic, this is not a safe place.

Lmao. Im beginning to suspect you have me blocked for some reason, because youre perfectly safe to just.. read the links I provided you.

LOL...Woodenrook has been waiting for this day for awhile. People actually taking him serious. Big day.

>gender affirming care isn't safe for kids
what's unsafe is our being forced to mature in a body that's pointedly not who we are

Zonbei posted...

Lmao. Im beginning to suspect you have me blocked for some reason, because youre perfectly safe to just.. read the links I provided you.

You wouldn't be able to see my posts. And, other than the harassment of trying to get me to talk about something I've stated multiple times I don't want to talk about, you're posts have been mostly fine.

WoodenRook posted...

You wouldn't be able to see my posts. And, other than the harassment of trying to get me to talk about something I've stated multiple times I don't want to talk about, you're posts have been mostly fine.

Then read the links I posted. You dont have to talk about it. Just act in good faith and allow evidence to actually make it into your brain.

I suspect you may not know what the word harassment means.

Zonbei posted...

Then read the links I posted. You dont have to talk about it. Just act in good faith and allow evidence to actually make it into your brain.

I suspect you may not know what the word harassment means.

aggressive pressure or intimidation.

Like repeatedly pushing something when the person has stated many times they aren't interested.

WoodenRook posted...

aggressive pressure or intimidation.

Like repeatedly pushing something when the person has stated many times they aren't interested.

My guy, asking you to look at facts and evidence is not harassment.

You refusing to do so is remarkably telling. Like, you're "not interested" in being more knowledgeable about a subject? Why? Because it makes you uncomfortable?