The costs of trans visibility

you say it's not healthcare, I say it is. I assume there are some differences we have with the facts about whether or not something can be constituted as healthcare. unless you find there to be some normativity in the term healthcare in which case we're really just saying "I think this is good so I don't mind paying for it, I think this is bad so I do mind paying for it". In which case... alright sure but then your statement that you don't want to support non-healthcare related things is tautological because "not healthcare" just means "bad" in this context.

And no, you said you even have a problem with society paying for healthcare too.

Well most countries don't consider elective cosmetic surgery healthcare to be covered by the public, nor do private insurance companies usually cover it in most countries

Unclear why FP wanted to write that insane headline, but in the article you can read it's about guidelines and not mandates, as it's obvious, because POTUS in the USA can't lockdown anything at all.

And it was the 1 year+ school closures which destroyed young ppl mental health, and those were 100% democrat made (local gvmnts)

This is a 1-day ban, but I got banned for "personal attacks" and "transphobia" again for a week for assessing coordi's views as misogynistic and homophobic? How is it "denying the existence of transgender people" when I'm actively talking about them? You are referring to them as "transgender" yourself, which isn't sex.

We literally can't even state the argument without you banning us for it. And I very... coordially asked him 50 questions in a back-and-forth to clarify his positions, which I eventually deemed homophobic and misogynistic, which they are. Are those wrongthink ban-worthy distinctions now, too?

You calling everything adhered to reality "transphobic" and equating normal views with Stormfront users is attacking an argument? Your entire M.O. is "there's no way I can actually attack their argument or defend mine so I'll ban their argument and attack them when they make it."

What is wrong with you, seriously? Lower the temperature? I thanked him for answering and politely agreed to disagree. He began cursing and insulting me repeatedly. You can't even keep up your own facade or invented rules. Can you define what you even mean saying "transgender" because you seem to be banning me for not agreeing that means they're whatever sex they claim.

tbf, he didn't say it was proof, just evidence for a biological correlation to homosexuality. The other potential confounding variables you mention wouldn't challenge that, I don't think. The rates of concordance of sexual orientation is higher in identical twins than in fraternal, though. Still, it's not 100%, so there's obviously additional factors at play.

Also, a "sexual preference" might imply a choice, which can be seen as dismissive to some folks (particularly when certain demographics also refer to their orientation as having a "genital preference"). I know some people use it interchangeably with "sexual orientation", though, but just saying.

If you can't figure it out, I doubt teaching you will extend your time here. You should probably just say goodbye to this subforum now.

"Sexual preference" is used by homosexual associations here in Italy when they claim "discrimination based on sexual preferences" shouldn't exist, I think it's proper and clearly not demeaning, also because it covers bisexuality better than most other expressions, and can also cover fetishes which shouldn't be discriminated against, at least by the public sector (a person who engages in consensual BDSM with adults shouldn't lose his public sector job because of it and so on)

Obviously. You should also think about this in regards to the explosion of trans. The explosion isn't simply explained by acceptance etc.

The numbers of youth showing the dysphoria is "just a phase" (or however you want to phrase it) is extremely high. That's never the case with homosexuality. The rates of trans kids in red states vs blue states is eye opening to say the least. They are giving these kids drugs that sterilize them before they become adults. Let's not pretend there's just a little whoopsie daisy lets buy some different outfits consequence

That brings us to the 7 year old trans kid mentioned. Do you think they'd be "trans" if they weren't introduced to some form of gender ideology or information? Like would it even occur to them "they're in the wrong body" or whatever? Would they even consider they're a girl unless you told them their preferences and interests made them so?

I think people underestimate not just how influential others are on this child but also something more perverse. I think a lot of parents are more than happy to have a "trans kid" so they can demonstrate how progressive and accepting they are. So much so that they actually celebrate the childs transition. That makes the parents very very very good people and it's more than rewarding to wear that crown around in their social circles. And people built like that can even subconsciously nudge a child in that direction. Oh you like pink? Your sister and other girls like pink too. Do you think you might be or feel like a little girl? It's great if you do. etc etc.

The number of hollywood moms with boys that trans and adopted boys who trans is like mathematically impossible

This type of thinking is common but should be abandoned the first time someone actually thinks all of this through

Yes ok girls are getting boob jobs

1. It's a separate issue
2. they aren't sterilizing the child
3. the "mutilation" is always subjective but come on. This is so different and mild compared to trans surgery it's like comparing balding treatments to amputation. Have you actually seen or read about bottom surgeries? Do you think a double mastectomy is the same as a boob job? The same for a minor?
4. If something is a bigger problem then your smaller problem is a contradiction. Oh you donated to the animal shelter? there's starving kids. Oh you donated to aids? Its less significant than diabetes, which is less significant than cancer, etc
5. cost benefit analysis. we tolerate an incredible amount of senseless death by automobile. Why? because we need to get places. Why not ban cars, people are dying. Ok how about the speed limit is 25 mph? because we need to get places.

but pitbulls mauling kids is sand on the beach compared to car accidents. Right but we need to get places. a pitbull is a dog. There are also infinite dogs that are less aggressive and less capable of damage. trying to tie things like this together and calling someone a hypocrite is just embarrassing

It always amazes me how some people just can't use "trans" in a sentence. It is "explosion of trans PEOPLE". You wouldn't say that immigration led to an "explosion of black", no it is black PEOPLE.

yeah no pit bulls is like installing safety belts in cars

no cars is not no pit bulls, it's no pets at all

oh look for the million and first time uke avoids answering questions directly related to this thread and his own beliefs in favor or name-calling or language policing. Thanks for showing up

tans ideology lead to an explosion in trans

trans-gender
trans-ition

If I'm going to publish a novel i'll take your advice and get an editor. but for now, stop embarrassing yourself and at least try to contribute something

no he meant it like I do when I use trans-ness.

the explosion of the phenomenon of transness

this has never once happened, doubt it'll start anytime soon, best to just be left on ignore

Yeah, pretty wild yoou think a cordial conversation involves calling the other person homophobic and misogynistic. Then when you "thank" me after unilaterally declaring me homophobic and misogynistic I didn't take it even remotely serious. That isn't how people have cordial conversations.

You lash out at everyone an literally never have a single moment of introspection. Maybe you are just a bad person? I'm sure that never crossed your mind

I've thought about it. They aren't even remotely close.

You aren't a good judge at what is or isn't embarrassing. Point in case, your body of work on 2p2

You spend all your time in this thread quoting and supporting anti-trans rhetoric while playing the victim across the main threads

If you think that is useful contribution then I have a counter point to sell you

Like if you really are generally okay with trans people and only care about womens sports then maybe stand on that stance for a couple of days? Admonish bad posts, point out bad opinions, defend your stance a little? Quit this whiny sophistry that make you seem staunchly anti trans

Uke, I’m curious do you deny the social influence of trans identification like coordi as well? When teens tell stories of going down a rabbit hole of trans content + finding the trans community on social media, this has no influence on their trans identification?

Yep. It's nothing more than a language game to him. He can't answer the ''hard'' questions.

Do you think you could have been convinced you are gay or trans or bi?

Is "Could I be trans?" a harmful thought to have at any point in a life?

*Cuts to scene of coordi thinking about it*

Coordi: “Since I haven’t been convinced to identify as trans, nobody else is socially influenced to trans identify.”

My intention is not to police thoughts. Do I believe promoting + censoring criticism of the trans identity is harmful? Absolutely, because the trans identity seeks to replace self identification which is harmful over time.

Now, people are faking their trans kids to score lefty points to a significant degree.

Wow.