The costs of trans visibility

Um .. .you think Trump and like 10% of the GOP should be executed? The death penalty doesn't make sense logically. If you're so worried about rape donate to #metoo or some women's charity fund as many rape victims don't seek prosecution.

you're so close to getting it... so close

"advocating for coed prisons" is a secular position with no inclusion of religion.

"teaching creationism and evolution side by side" is breaking the boundary of church and state to teach kids Christian doctrine.

What's the irony or point you want to make? How is advocating for the end of segregation and better justice system discriminatory?

gender theory is a religion.

A set of arbitrary ideas about moral values predicated on absolute certainty of truth with no external validation.

The gender is the soul.

Trans women are women is the transubstantiation.

"science" as written by radical fanatics peer reviewed by radical fanatics is the scripture.

"women with dicks" is the virgin mary having birth

And so on. Total complete absolute bullshit that no rational person would even start thinking has a basis of truth, ie a religion

step outside your value system for a moment

make everything neutral, replace creationism with widget a, replace trans with widget b and so on and so forth - there is nothing about them whatsover, just widget a and widget b etc etc

repeat all the prior discussions with those replacements. do you now see the contradictory nature of your belief?

you're not actually advocating for what you think you are - you're instead saying x is right and y is wrong and we need to get rid of y and fully support x

but you pretend like it's something else, you pretend like it's a wholly objective crusade for inclusion, when it's in fact the opposite

For them , they are neutral, they are convinced it's "science" in a neutral science. It's scientism, a form of religion

Gender theory is accepted science everywhere except Russia, Hungary, and Romania. This drivel should all be banned. It's denying the lived experience and discriminatory toward all transgender individuals.

Lol no it isn't

What aren't you getting here?

LOL @ telling other people they don't get to decide the meaning of words, while deciding the meaning of words.

Homophobia has meant "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or gay people" for decades. The meaning of the suffix has evolved, as the meaning of many words has, and in the case of phobia it's not a recent phenomenon. You may not like it, but homophobia and transphobia do indeed included aversion and discrimination, not just fear.

As for the whole issue of transwomen in sports and prisons, this isn't something that's ever going to be resolved by a bunch of us in this thread. It's complicated. "Self declaration" seems fine in many areas of life, but when it comes to prisons and high level sports, something further is often needed, and that's already happening in many places. One size doesn't have to fit all. It doesn't have to be either anyone who says they're trans does what they want, or only biological sex determines everything.

Rhetorical question: do the Woke believe in pluralism?

Dialogue, negotiation, and compromise is the way forward.

It's okay to have illogical or antiscience views, but it's not okay to force those views into law. The US shouldn't have any policies that stem from religion as this would violate the constitution:

In which areas of life *that have legal consequences for third parties* does self identification seem fine? because for all areas of life which have 0 legal consequences for anyone else (ie where your self identification never, directly or indirectly, legally forces any bejaviour to anyone) , no one cares ITT.

Which other examples do you know where a pure subjective opinion has legal consequences for third parties? i think X for myself therefore that person is legally mandated to do Y. Name some please.

The left raped and abused the word "exploitation" starting with Marx. That doesn't make the marxist meaning correct then, not now, not ever. It works for any word.

There still can't be any exploitation definitionally in any mutually voluntary exchange, and there can never be, no matter how many leftists for how long try to claim the contrary.

Same is true for the -phobic suffix which will forever mean fear and fear alone for non leftists, and so on.

The intellectual masturbations of a multitude of leftists don't make language.

who gets to decide what is a religion? keep in mind that any religious tenet can be framed as a non religious one

I am not afraid of trans people existence. I don't give a **** at all about all people who can't materially affect my life lol. I just want to guarantee the fact that trans exist, can't be used to affect my life or that of people i care about negatively.

There is no hate, i stated my position very clearly and you will be reported if you keep insulting me personally with lies.

My position is that adult trans people should be free to do literally want they want with their body , on their own money, and self-identify *with whomever gives a ***** as they please.

Taxpayers should never be involved with anything related to trans-ness, as it is not a disease, minors shouldn't be touched at all by the topic in any way or form by the state directly or indirectly, and no law or regulation should be changed accounting for the existence of trans people, who exist, but whose existence should be treated the same as the existence of red hair people. A completly irrelevant characteristic of those people with no legal consequences ever.

and now you've given up the facade at least

Report away it's insane that you're allowed to post. You reject the existence and openly discriminate against millions of people and insist on murdering practically anyone who disagrees wit you. I agree the government shouldn't pass any trans legislation, but your post is self contradictory as you seem to imply anti-trans legislation

Given the way you declare definitions of words invalid, I have no idea. But one area I can think of that has been discussed in this thread would be elementary school sports. Bathroom use would be another.

Again, LOL. To the best of my knowledge, homophobia and transphobia have always had this meaning - they would be rather useless words if they meant nothing more than "fear of". Just because you don't like the way a suffix is being used doesn't make a poster wrong when they use a word in the same way as every English dictionary I've ever seen. And it certainly doesn't make you correct when you assert the poster is deciding the definition. The poster was using the dictionary definition, and you're the one who wants to "decide the meaning of words".

Unfortunately, in the last 30 years or so, words have aquired expanded meanings in a way that confuses things and makes the language worse

When homophobia adds the meanings of hatred or discrimination against homosexuals, now there is no word that specifically means fear of them.

I believe in the past it was used for such things as people not wanting gay teachers in their kids' schools (afraid it will turn them gay), or for a man who killed another man for hitting on him.

At some point it would be nice if you said what you mean. I posed a hypothetical where segregation is ended to potentially solve a problem. I don't think coed anything will work in the real world, but it could in theory.

I don't think you are fascist, but probably racist based on your random rants.

FYP. 😀 This is nothing new - language evolves, and not always for the better.

Is this really a big problem? Both of your examples are "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuals". In the first example, I suppose in the past one could argue that was a fear based in ignorance, but I would hope we're beyond that sort of thing now. And in the second case, I can't see why a distinction would need to be made. Does it really matter if the person literally hated all gay men, or just had an irrational fear of them? I don't think a lack of a distinct word for "fear of homosexuals" is causing much of an issue these days.

i've always said exactly what i mean, i think you just struggle to see your own inconsistencies and are thus quite confused, you wouldn't first person to put the blinders on for their own behavior

and please, quote a single racist post of mine or otherwise apologize or just never post again