'Hundreds' of young trans people seeking help to return to original sex

[Nick333]

They're not fukkin men.
They will never be fukkin men.
[bInteresting thing is there are more females wanting to transition to male than males to female, among the younger generation.
Women are owning this ****, however, and not having hysterics about trans men having to use the gents, or compete in the men's sports category or beating people up who misgender them.
There seems to be a fundamental difference in approach between MtF and FtM transgender folk.
I wonder what that difference could be?[/]

Well, surely that's because women (steroided up, and breasts strapped down or not) aren't much of a physical threat to men? And men generally don't make a big noise when they are victimised by women anyway.

FtM transgenders are probably just quietly physically and/or mentally abusing their girlfriends like lesbians tend to do.

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

Well, surely that's because women (steroided up, and breasts strapped down or not) aren't much of a physical threat to men? And men generally don't make a big noise when they are victimised by women anyway.

FtM transgenders are probably just quietly physically and/or mentally abusing their girlfriends like lesbians tend to do.

Got it in one.

 

[Nick333]

Got it in one.

So basically women are better because they're ineffectual?

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

So basically women are better because they're ineffectual?

I didn't say women are "better".

 

[buka001]

You still think this virtue signalling BS works? Sorry, not when it enables child abuse from mentally fkup adults. GFY.

Christianity enabled child abuse for years and years. What have you done about that?

 

[Nick333]

Christianity enabled child abuse for years and years. What have you done about that?

Still with the cheap shots? Careful, one might begin to suspect that you're more inclined towards raging against your own hatreds than you are about protecting minorities.

 

[Agent_Smith]

 

[Pegasus]

Like the graphs. They are very appropriate to the subject. The second one loses the balls and then it gets very pink.

It shows how the progressives argue.
They can only justify their ideology as the answer to nazism / the far fight.
So in order to win against an opponent they have to paint them as a Nazi first, otherwise no argument.

So they will always try to get their opponent to defend some or other trait that a nazi has, eg. if you say you eat breakfast, then they reply with Nazi's also ate breakfast therefore you are one.

This brings them a double victory. They have proven that their ideology is correct and they have exposed a nazi / bigot.

To counter the centrist / sane lefty is difficult for them, that's why they have invented "white privilege".
So then you have to debunk this and also explain that all people had their kuk in life etc... (very frustrating).

If you're not white then they'll say you're a "coconut", "uncle tom", "not really black" or whatever insult they can come up with. And then from there, its easy to link you to the far right. This brings in their standard well rehearsed arguments again.

 

[Techne]

Christianity enabled child abuse for years and years. What have you done about that?

So too the Muslims, the pagans,the atheists, the Jews, the government etc. What? Are you some sick SJW that wants child abuse equality now... aired with an nhealthy dose of anti-Christian hatred and bigotry. SJW Sicko

 

[buka001]

Still with the cheap shots? Careful, one might begin to suspect that you're more inclined towards raging against your own hatreds than you are about protecting minorities.

Cheap or factual?

So Techne can launch an unsubstantiated claim, but I cannot rebut with a factual one?

 

[buka001]

So too the Muslims, the pagans,the atheists, the Jews, the government etc. What? Are you some sick SJW that wants child abuse equality now... aired with an nhealthy dose of anti-Christian hatred and bigotry. SJW Sicko

Nice strawman. Anyway your bigoted projections are your own.

 

[Nick333]

Cheap or factual?

So Techne can launch an unsubstantiated claim, but I cannot rebut with a factual one?

They're not mutually exclusive. You didn't rebut (i. e. Claim or prove false) you just employed a whataboutism.

 

[buka001]

They're not mutually exclusive. You didn't rebut (i. e. Claim or prove false) you just employed a whataboutism.

True, fair enough.

I suppose it is more of a if you are so concerned about this unsubstantiated claim you make, how has his concerns about pedophilia in the clergy been manifested?

An examination of the rank hypocrisy.

 

[Techne]

True, fair enough.

I suppose it is more of a if you are so concerned about this unsubstantiated claim you make, how has his concerns about pedophilia in the clergy been manifested?

An examination of the rank hypocrisy.

Or it is just you caring more for abused Christian children compared to children from mentally ill parents. Who knew?

 

[Nick333]

True, fair enough.

I suppose it is more of a if you are so concerned about this unsubstantiated claim you make, how has his concerns about pedophilia in the clergy been manifested?

An examination of the rank hypocrisy.

Yes, attempting to point out your opponents hypocrisy instead of refuting their actual point is the essence of the whataboutism fallacy.

 

[LD50]

Yes, attempting to point out your opponents hypocrisy instead of refuting their actual point is the essence of the whataboutism fallacy.

Powerful statement. I shall like it

 

[buka001]

Yes, attempting to point out your opponents hypocrisy instead of refuting their actual point is the essence of the whataboutism fallacy.

Yes, I know. I agree with you.

I could go down the road of posting the lack of evidence that the advocacy of Transgender rights does not in any measurable way equate to the advocacy of child abuse.

But then Xarog will come and say well even though the evidence is near zero and there is no data, it still means that in the realms of probability it is possible that this could happen.

 

[EADC]

Christianity enabled child abuse for years and years. What have you done about that?

Prayed?

 

[buka001]

Or it is just you caring more for abused Christian children compared to children from mentally ill parents. Who knew?

No. I disagree entirely with the concept that parents can change their kids gender. If someone wants to change their gender, this should only happen when they are 18+.

But yeah, lets just strawman and gaslight!

 

[Nick333]

Yes, I know. I agree with you.

I could go down the road of posting the lack of evidence that the advocacy of Transgender rights does not in any measurable way equate to the advocacy of child abuse.

But then Xarog will come and say well even though the evidence is near zero and there is no data, it still means that in the realms of probability it is possible that this could happen.

Well, I think that argument is pretty simple. It goes like: encouraging children who display gender confusion to identify as other than their biological sex, or treating them with hormones is child abuse. You could refute that argument by proving that no one does or simply by denying that it's abuse. In other words prove that it doesn't happen or own the position that it's OK.