Squabbles, another recent reddit alternative, seems to be taking the doomed "free speech" path
Squabbles, another recent reddit alternative, seems to be taking the doomed "free speech" path
您正在查看单个对话串。
281 评论
-
This seems to be the reason for the change (jayclees is the creator and admin of the site):
-
It's always telling when people describe a minority as a "political movement" rather than... people
-
It’s also telling when people frame any and all discussion around anything LGBT+ as “transphobic” and “trying to kill trans people”.
The current gender/trans ideology isn’t just scientific fact that has to be followed and believed. People should be allowed to disagree and question it without being censored and banned.
That seems to be the point the creator is making - they didn’t make it to be a circle jerking safe space for only the far left “progressives”. They made it for everyone to be able to talk about their beliefs without being censored and banned, but one ideological group absolutely doesn’t want that.
-
That's the point OP was making when they said LGBT+ isn't political. LGBT+ isn't an ideology for people to share "beliefs" about. It will exist whether or not you believe in it, and normalizing people who say I don't believe in it is essentially denying the LGBT+ person's identity. It's ok to say you don't understand, or even like it, but to simply say "you're making up your gender identity" is wrong and harmful.
-
The current LGBTQ+ ideology is a political ideology though. It’s not just facts and it’s not about “existing” like people try to make it out to be.
The current trend of “a 3 year old boy that plays with barbies is trans so should be put on puberty blockers” is an ideology, same with “trans women have no physical advantages over biological women”, same with trying to teach 8 year olds about anal sex and masturbation. None of these things have anything to do with people “existing”.
The ideology that says simply saying you’re a woman makes you a woman and therefore are entitled to women-only places and things like scholarships and awards is what most people are against. No one cares if a 25 year old biological male wants to put on a dress and wear makeup and call themself Jane. Most people will even play along with your new pronouns. People shouldn’t be forced to by law though, and that’s another of the big issues people have.
Tl;dr - being trans isn’t political. Pushing the current trans beliefs and ideologies like gender identity, self ID, and “trans women are women” is.
-
How are medically approved operations by doctors an ideology? As long as the parents and their doctors have identified an issue they need to address, and the procedure they decide on is safe, reversible, and is known to make the child's life happier, who are you and I to stop them?
Pushing the current trans beliefs and ideologies like gender identity, self ID, and “trans women are women” is.
That's conservatives making it political. Claiming your own gender identity is not political, it's a natural human behavior to self identify. Please explain how you can say trans people can exist while at the same time if they try to self-identity then they're being political? There's no "conservative gene" that prevents you from choosing your gender identity (i.e. Caitlyn Jenner). Just acknowledging transgenderism exists is completely apolitical. If you see it as "pushing gender identity" that's your problem.
-
How are medically approved operations by doctors an ideology?
I didn't once mention medically approved operations? If you're talking about doing them on kids then that's a whole other issue.
and the procedure they decide on is safe, reversible, and is known to make the child’s life happier, who are you and I to stop them?
And here lies the problem - parents pushing their ideology on to their kids. Also what "trans surgeries" are "safe and reversible"? None. Cutting off your male genitalia is not reversible. A hysterectomy is not reversible. Cutting off your breasts is not reversible (though you can at least try and make up for it with breast implants). Puberty blockers are not fully reversible, and most countries are now acknowledging this. You simply cannot stunt someones physical (and mental) growth and have it just resume years later as if nothing has changed. There are zero long term studies on puberty blockers. There are however known long term issues with them.
it’s a natural human behavior to self identify.
Not as a different gender/sex it's not. It has only become a thing very recently, where simply saying "I'm a woman" now means you're a woman, no questions asked.
Please explain how you can say trans people can exist while at the same time if they try to self-identity then they’re being political?
That's not at all what I said. Pushing for being able to let "Self ID" give you access to the opposite sexes spaces and sports and awards and other things is the political part. Trans people existing has nothing to do with that. The issues with self ID are that men who have literally done nothing to transition can now go in to womens events/spaces without question. A great example is the weightlifting competitions where gender Self ID was allowed, so a anti-self id man entered and just annihilated the competition as a protest to show how stupid it is. The only requirement for him to enter the womens competition was for him to tick a box saying he's a woman.
Transgender and gender ideology are different things. Transgender is "I am the other gender to what I was born as". Gender ideology is "I can be whatever gender i want, whenever i want, and can change gender a thousand times during the day, and I should get all of the rights afforded to whichever sex/gender i call myself at the time". They're not one and the same.
-
I didn’t once mention medically approved operations? If you’re talking about doing them on kids then that’s a whole other issue.
No, I don't approve of irreversible medical surgeries on people under age of 16, but that's not a thing in any case. It's in response to your comments about 3 year olds getting puberty blockers (which is also not a thing) in which case it is temporary, reversible, and typically starts at 8 (10+ for boys).
And here lies the problem - parents pushing their ideology on to their kids. Also what “trans surgeries” are “safe and reversible”? None. Cutting off your male genitalia is not reversible. A hysterectomy is not reversible
My child is sick, feeling depressed, I go to the doctor, they discuss possible issues, and through preset, clinical guidelines, they decide that treatment for gender dysmorphia is an option. Again, reversible, safe treatments like puberty blockers and therapy that help prevent children from self-harm and further confusion about their identify. It's not like they're passing out puberty blockers like candies for funsies and doing this for fun.
I'm not even talking about transgender surgeries, which happens at 18+ of age.
it’s a natural human behavior to self identify. Not as a different gender/sex it’s not. It has only become a thing very recently, where simply saying “I’m a woman” now means you’re a woman, no questions asked.
Say's who? If one wants another to call them by another thing, who are we to dispute that? Gender CAN be fluid. Your biological sex that you were born with hasn't changed, it's their GENDER. Gender doesn't have to match your sex. And transgenderism has been a thing since ancient times. Have you considered that maybe more people are coming "out" recently because they're feeling safer to express themselves?
The issues with self ID are that men who have literally done nothing to transition can now go in to womens events/spaces without question. A great example is the weightlifting competitions where gender Self ID was allowed, so a anti-self id man entered and just annihilated the competition as a protest to show how stupid it is. The only requirement for him to enter the womens competition was for him to tick a box saying he’s a woman.
There have been exactly 0 assaults by transgender women entering a public bathroom. And your concerns about a troll entering sports competitions is going to out-weight all of the self-harm and suicides committed by people suffering from unaddressed/repressed gender identity issues?
Gender ideology is “I can be whatever gender i want, whenever i want, and can change gender a thousand times during the day, and I should get all of the rights afforded to whichever sex/gender i call myself at the time”.
Show me one time where that has happened and it has harmed someone else by doing it. And again, if they want to change their gender once or a thousand times, how is it any of your business? Besides sports competitions and bathrooms, I mean.
Having empowerment over their gender identity is an important part of being a transgender person, denying them that right is inhuman and cruel. Gender ideology, or whatever you want to call it, is simply (in my opinion) expressing a sense of safety and freedom to others that want to identify as something else from what they were born as. And believe it or not, this can happen whether you are conservative or liberal - it is absolutely a HUMAN desire, not a political one.
Look, I understand that if I call someone that looks and talk like a women a she, but wants to be called a man, there's going to be confusion. But what do I lose out of my day if they simply said "sorry, I'm actually a he" and I respect that moving forward?
-
No, I don’t approve of irreversible medical surgeries on people under age of 16, but that’s not a thing in any case.
That thing that never happens yet still happens isn't actually happening? lol Also why did you choose 16 as your cutoff? They're still legally, physically, and mentally a child at 16.
in which case it is temporary, reversible, and typically starts at 8 (10+ for boys).
Not fully reversible, and the sooner your "side" acknowledges this the better. Governments all over the world are recognising this now and are removing all mentions of "fully reversible" from their documents and legislation, and many are now outlawing it altogether because there are literally no long term studies done to prove that they are reversible. The difference between 3 and 8 or 10 is completely irrelevant. A 8 year old has no better understanding of gender identity than a 3 year old, they lack the mental capacity for understanding this and they absolutely cannot understand the life long repercussions.
My child is sick, feeling depressed, I go to the doctor, they discuss possible issues, and through preset, clinical guidelines, they decide that treatment for gender dysmorphia is an option.
Sick? Gender dysphoria/dysmorphia doesn't make anyone "sick". You're also overlooking all of the places that hand out diagnoses and scripts for drugs after a literal 10 minute phone call, intentionally so most likely.
I’m not even talking about transgender surgeries, which happens at 18+ of age.
Apart from when they don't, like how you yourself even said in this same post that you're ok with it at 16 years of age. What is it, 18 or 16?
If one wants another to call them by another thing, who are we to dispute that?
Again, this is the problem - you can call yourself whatever you want. I. Don't. Care. Simply calling yourself a woman however should not mean that you now have access to women's sports and women only safe spaces like gyms and doctors etc.
There have been exactly 0 assaults by transgender women entering a public bathroom.
Come on mate, you don't even believe these lies.
And your concerns about a troll entering sports competition is going to out-weight all of the self-harm and suicides committed by people suffering from unaddressed gender identity issues?
The fact that even post gender affirming surgery the suicide rate doesn't decrease among transgender people says all that needs to be said. You're basically saying "let womens sports be taken over by biological males because if you don't the transgender people will kill themselves". I believe this is what you guys call "gaslighting"?
Show me one time where that has happened and it has harmed someone else by doing it.
I literally just did with the weightlifting example. A woman lost out on a prize because a man chose to be a woman so he could enter the competition. Self ID lets that happen. He did it to stop another self ID'ing transgender person from winning, to show how stupid the rule is. If you want other examples just look at the women that get raped in bloody rape crisis centres and even prisons by self id'ing males.
And again, if they want to change their gender a thousand times, how is it any of your business? Besides sports competitions and bathrooms.
Sports competitions and bathrooms etc in this situation are the only thing I am against. I don't care if you want to change your gender 1000000 times a day. It doesn't affect me. I don't care. As I've said many times, I care when it affects other people, such as in sporting competitions and bathrooms (and children of course).
Look, I understand that if I call someone that looks and talk like a women a she, but wants to be called a man, there’s going to be a confusion. But what do I lose out of my day if they simply said “sorry, I’m actually a he” and I respect that moving forward?
You're not going to get any disagreement from me though, this is what I keep saying. I have nothing against transgender people. Everyone can live their life identifying as whatever the hell they want, I don't care. I care about fairness, safety, and scientific facts though, so when you identifying as something else encroaches on any of that, that's when we have a problem.
-
Finally some sanity on this site.
-
❤️
-
-
-
FYI one of these things that never happen happened again:
-
-
Indigenous peoples have acknowledged a “third gender” aka non binary for centuries - way before colonization.
How can you say self identifying in regards to sex/gender is a recent ideology when it’s been part of human history for centuries?
Sounds like bland, generic, thoughtless conservative nonsense to eliminate other perspectives (especially when you discount them as new despite existing for centuries)
-
How can you say self identifying in regards to sex/gender is a recent ideology when it’s been part of human history for centuries?
It hasn't though. People are now using absurd leaps to try and pretend that it has been around for centuries, but it hasn't. Got some links to these "third gender" stories?
-
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-two-spirit-means-native_l_62aa0b3ce4b06169ca93c14e
https://www.ihs.gov/lgbt/health/twospirit/
https://www.ncai.org/policy-research-center/initiatives/Pruden-Edmo_TwoSpiritPeople.pdf
https://www.theindigenousfoundation.org/articles/the-history-of-two-spirit-folks
https://www.firstpeople.us/articles/the-two-spirit-people-of-indigenous-north-americans.html
-
lol "two spirit = third gender"
Those links say that the indigenous people used "two spirit" to refer to homosexuals. That's not at all like "self identifying".
-
-
-
-
-
-
Genuine question, what would you expect people who were born intersex to do? How would you know whether or not someone is intersex?
Edit: They do exist.
-
Chances are you and I will go our entire lives never coming in contact with an actual intersex person. Your children probably won’t either. Their children also won’t. Your parents wouldn’t have either. Statistically they’re just basically not a thing.
What would I have them do in regards to what exactly?
-
-
-
-
It is scientific fact; at least every major medical organization in the US is in total agreement about what you refer to as “gender ideology,” and what we call the existence of trans people.
“Just asking questions” about it is as disingenuous and false as “just asking questions” about evolution. If you truly believe trans people exist and deserve to be respected you wouldn’t feel the need to ask these questions.
But yes, the founder chose anti-trans concerns above trans concerns. LGBT people will leave and the platform will become a conservative circlejerk. You have that part right at least.
-
You've really jumped deep into things by assuming what the person you're responding to means isn't scientific fact is the actual existence of trans people. They could, but they were woefully vague.
Most people I've interacted with who have misgivings are more focused on things like the insistence that there are no differences between afab and amab bodies, and therefore trans women athletes should be allowed to compete against afab athletes.
That's a currently "unallowed to challenge" topic that pretty much immediately gets you labelled transphobic, but here's the rub: female athletes doping with testosterone to achieve higher muscle mass is something that is banned from sports competitions, so why does it matter whether it was artificially obtained via pill or naturally by the fact that they had years of body and muscle development as male before transistioning?
There's no good solution to this problem, but the fact that anyone who brings it up gets labelled as transphobic is ridiculous. It's not inherently denying trans people anything to discuss it (that has more to do with the person discussing it than the topic itself). For me it's an attempt to ensure that all female athletes afab trans or other are on an even playing field, ideally so people have less excuse to easily dismiss trans athlete achievements.
-
I don't think this is vague in the slightest:
The current gender/trans ideology isn’t just scientific fact that has to be followed and believed.
I know no person interested in trans liberation that also talks about "gender/trans ideology."
I find sports misgivings a red herring with regards to trans liberation. To me, it feels like asking someone to be less racist, and hearing them respond "well what about Black people in sports? What about white athletes' feelings? How do we determine if an athlete is white enough to compete against other whites?" The entire notion is wrong-headed to begin with. Yes, if we include trans people in sports, sometimes they might win. What's so bad about trans people winning at sports?
In any case, clearly the person I was responding to was not talking about this.
-
Here is the thing when it comes to sports, there are usually two main divisions in most sports, the best of the best league, and the women league. In most sports there is technically no rule against women playing in the best of the best leagues, but they are just at so much of a disadvantage it is almost unheard of for them to be able to compete at that level. The only reason that women only sports exist is to allow people with that biological disadvantage to compete professionally against others with the same disadvantage. It's a league that's sole purpose is to allow women to be competitive against other women because the men are just so much better.
It might sound like I'm bashing women's sports, but I'm not. I'm glad women have an avenue to compete at pro levels, because without women only sports they would not.
I have no problem with anybody trying to compete in the best of the best league, men, women, trans, black, white, etc. But when it comes to leagues specifically limited to give those in the league a fair competition, we shouldn't be opening that up to those who don't have the disadvantage that defines the league. This applies to women leagues, the special Olympics, and other limited leagues.
-
I know this, I just don’t think it matters. Our a priori assumption must be trans people should be included everywhere as much as possible, just like Black people or Jewish people. Fairness will adjust to our expectations, so everything will feel fine in the end, just as it did when we allowed other minorities to compete in leagues they were formerly barred from.
-
How can it not matter? You have a sport built around the idea of fair competition to a genetic physical weakness, and you think we should just throw that all away? I'm not sure why you are bringing race and nationality into this discussion, that's never been a race based disadvantage that we decided we needed to design sports around.
Our a priori assumption must be trans people should be included everywhere as much as possible,
I agree, but I think sports falls under "not possible" because they don't meet the requirements for the women's league. I have no problem with a trans league, or they are more than welcome to compete in the best of the best league. I don't think they should be competing in women's sports, it's unfair to all biological women athletes who compete against other biological women athletes.
And if you want to compare it to race, where the idea of a race segregated sport would be super controversial, let's just get rid of women's sports all together. Women are equal to men, right? They can do anything a man can do, right? What are we pretending women aren't equal by putting them in their own sports leagues? Let's just get rid of all women's sports, let them compete directly with the men, and may the best win.
-
I’m fine sorting people by weight classes or hormone levels. But gender is not a useful way to do that and hasn’t been for years. The Olympics, for example, tests your hormone levels and not what your natal sex was or what your genitals look like.
But ultimately I just don’t think sports matters more than peoples’ rights. So if we have to abolish gendered sports, especially below the ultra-professional level, I’m fine with that.
And yes, people did indeed claim certain races had advantages in sports and pointed to science about muscle density to support their theories. They would consider themselves well-justified by Black people dominating certain sports. It is the same with trans athletes.
-
But gender is not a useful way to do that and hasn’t been for years.
So you are for getting rid of women's sports, special Olympics, and everything in that realm and just letting everyone compete as people of the human race?
But ultimately I just don’t think sports matters more than peoples’ rights.
What rights? There is no right to compete in stuff you are not eligible for.
So if we have to abolish gendered sports, especially below the ultra-professional level, I’m fine with that.
So you are fine with women essentially never being competitive in sports? Personally I think it's great they have their own league, because otherwise there wouldn't really be women in sports.
And yes, people did indeed claim certain races had advantages in sports and pointed to science about muscle density to support their theories. They would consider themselves well-justified by Black people dominating certain sports. It is the same with trans athletes.
Except that they are competing in the open to everyone category, even if some races had an advantage, that's legal in an open to everyone category. Women's sports are not open to everyone, only to biological females who don't take performance enhancing substances. Again, if you want to essentially remove women from sports by pretending biological males and females are the same, that's your grave to dig.
Race isn't the same as gender, I'm hoping you realize that. In today's world, gender is more a state of mind than anything else, race is not. I can choose to become the opposite gender, I can't choose to be black as a white person.
If trans athletes want to compete in sports, compete in the open to everyone league, don't try to compete in leagues you don't qualify for. Women's sports, if they are to still exist, are for biological and non testosterone taking females only.
-
-
-
-
Exactly.
The NFL isn’t a male league for example - it’s an open league. How many women have ever even made it to the tryout stage? One. A kicker. She didn’t come close to making even a training squad.
Sam Kerr, the best women’s soccer player on earth, wouldn’t even get close to making a men’s pro team. The world beating women’s USA team, winners of the past 2 world cups, got annihilated by an under 15s boys team.
Sex matters in sport, not gender.
-
-
The issue isn't just that they might win, it's that they will naturally dominate in competitions where biological makeup matters.
If you don't see how that's not fair I don't know what to tell you. There are hard rules in biology that don't mesh with gender identity politics, and there's no way around that.
-
Fair to whom?
Lots of people were worried about Black people dominating certain sports. And, as it turns out, Black people do dominate certain sports. Is that unfair to white people?
No. People are just different. Fairness adjusts and we get over it.
So too here.
-
How do biological women adapt to someone like Lia Thomas? Are they just going to magically all just grow another foot in height and increase their bone density and muscle mass to levels that women can’t naturally get?
-
-
-
You’re right, it’s not vague at all - it’s not denying trans people exist in any way. Trans people existing isn’t an ideology, so questioning the current trans and gender ideology has nothing to do with trans people existing or not. You’re jumping to conclusions because you want to dismiss any opinion you don’t agree with, and currently the “that’s transphobic!” line is basically a get out of jail free card in that way. Just call someone transphobic and get them banned so you don’t have to have your opinion challenged, create that echo chamber you want so badly.
Your response to the sports issue of “what’s so wrong with trans women winning women’s sporting events” says it all. “Who cares about biological women, the feelings of trans women matter more.”
Trans women can compete with men. If there is no physical or biological advantage for males then why do they need to compete with the women? They can compete with the men and should do just fine.
Lia Thomas is all that needs to be pointed out for why your ideology here is wrong. 500+ ranked man……instantly #1 ranked woman. Breaks all the women’s records. Where are the trans men swimmers dominating the men’s division in swimming? Or in track and field? Cycling? Anywhere at all?!
-
-
Bingo.
No one denies trans people exist, but this is how the “progressives” that want males competing with females in sport and using female-only services frame any and all questioning of their ideology and motives.
-
-
If you truly believe trans people exist and deserve to be respected you wouldn’t feel the need to ask these questions.
I don't agree. I have A LOT of questions about gender identity to which I can't hypothesize answers because as a cis/het person I have no idea what it means and what it feels like being transgender, and I grew up in a time and a place where nobody ever talked about gender identity. The only way I can educate myself is by asking questions. Now I know a lot of people in the LGBTQ community are kinda fed up answering this kind of questions, and with good reason (cf. the "just asking questions" posture of anti-trans people). But some of us are being honest at just asking questions.
-
Those aren't the kinds of questions the OP was talking about; their dogwhistle about "trans/gender ideology isn't scientific fact" shows that they are indeed the kind of anti-trans person who is "just asking questions" to harass trans people.
If you have legitimate questions there are many excellent resources on the Internet and even in Lemmy itself where LGBTQ people will be happy to chat with you, if you approach them in a respectful manner :)
-
Gender ideology is not scientific fact. Gender as it is now know has literally no basis in science. Sex is biological reality. Gender is now a “feeling”.
-
I'm happy to inform you that gender is also a scientific fact: https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/what-do-we-mean-by-sex-and-gender/ It literally has a basis in science and you can both study it and perform science on it!
-
That's disingenuous and your own link doesn't support what you are saying. The link demonstrates that gender to refer to self-identity is both recent and an artificial distinction. The science behind transgenderism is far from settled as much as people would like it to be. We don't even know what causes it.
-
Oh no… it does say exactly that and the science is indeed settled. There’s no “artificial distinction;” science says gender and sex are indeed different. Unless of course you can link a reputable scientific organization that disagrees with that overwhelming consensus?
We don’t know what causes most cancers either. That doesn’t mean they can’t be studied scientifically.
-
I didn't say it shouldn't be scientifically studied. It definitely should be, especially the extremely high rates of comorbid mental illnesses in trans/non-binary people.
The article you linked states that gender is now commonly considered a social construct rather than tied to your biological sex. They are making the distinction so that there is no confusion when reading their papers.
The science is not settled, they are conceding that the common use of the term now has a different meaning than it did in the past.
-
Your own link say says that gender is a social construct now. They're saying that there is literally no science involved, there is no basis in scientific fact there.
-
-
-
That's not "scientific fact". For something to be scientific fact it has to have scientific facts supporting it.
From that article:
In the study of human subjects, the term gender should be used to refer to a person's self-representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions on the basis of the individual's gender presentation.
"self representation" is how you feel. It's a feeling. That's not scientific fact. Going "we acknowledge that society now treats gender as a new thing separate to sex" isn't the same as it being a scientifically proven fact.
-
I’m really not seeing the logic here, so called "feelings" are scientific facts and we do studies on them all the time. Is hunger not a feeling? Same thing with self-representation. Those aren’t nebulous concepts. Those are well-established scientific facts. Gender is an important part of self-representation and from all indications, one people have very little control over.
-
Gender is an important part of self-representation and from all indications, one people have very little control over.
So why are there people changing their "gender identity" multiple times a day?
so called “feelings” are scientific facts and we do studies on them all the time
Show me a scientific study that has found any existence whatsoever of "gender identity" through science. The very article linked here says it's a social construct. Social constructs are not "scientific facts".
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Why do you guys always always jump straight to “you’re trying to deny trans people exist”? No one is saying trans people don’t exist. people are, however, opposed to people telling preschoolers that if they like stereotypical opposite sex things that they’re trans and should choose a new name and wear the other genders stereotypical clothes. It’s indoctrination.
If a kid still believes in Santa clause, telling them they’re trans and giving them praise and letting them choose their own name etc is forcing your ideology on them. They don’t know any better. All they know is an adult is telling them something so it must be true. Again - they believe in Santa clause and the tooth fairy. They don’t have the mental capacity to understand these things. They don’t have the mental capacity to be making permanent life altering decisions.
This whole “just asking questions” bullshit is just a way the “progressives” try to weaponise anyone questioning their beliefs and ideologies.
If lgbtq people can’t stand seeing people have different opinions to them then they should leave. They shouldn’t be trying to get everyone else banned.
-
It’s indoctrination.
This is totally nonsense. No one is "indoctrinating" children... except those who claim that children can't be trans. I would encourage you to swallow your pride and your preconceived notions and actually talk to trans people, many of whom report knowing exactly who they were at the first age they were aware of gender.
Anyway, the rest of your point is basically hateful bullshit. If you can't deal with LGBT people and our opinions, you're the one that should get out. We frankly don't need you.
-
No one is “indoctrinating” children… except those who claim that children can’t be trans.
When people say this they mean that children don't have the mental capacity to make that life changing decision. Again - kids believe in santa clause, the easter bunny, and the tooth fairy. They are extremely easily influenced and will believe what their parents tell them to a fault. If you tell a kid they're trans because they like the colour pink as a boy or blue as a girl, they're gonna believe you. That is the indoctrination people are talking about.
Are there kids that actually have gender dysphoria? Sure. They're the extreme minority of the kids that are currently trans though, because they don't even understand gender let alone "gender identity". Even teenagers aren't mentally developed enough to be making life altering decisions, which is why we don't let under 18 year olds get tattoos, drink, vote, etc. If you accept that these restrictions need to be in place for children, how can you be ok with giving them life altering drugs and surgeries?
Anyway, the rest of your point is basically hateful bullshit.
Sigh....there's the usual "transphobic" type dismissal/attack used to try and stop any and all discussion of differing viewpoints.
If you can’t deal with LGBT people and our opinions, you’re the one that should get out. We frankly don’t need you.
I can deal with LGBT people, I have no issues with them at all as I've said many times. I've explained why I don't, and what I do have problems with. Ironic that you say "We frankly don’t need you." because if that were true you wouldn't be constantly trying to force your beliefs on me.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"Let's have a reasonable rational debate about whether certain groups should have the right to exist! If you're a member of one of these groups, please be respectful to the people who say you should be exterminated!"
-
"Alright. Compromise: We only kill half of you."
-
-
-
honestly reading this, it just sounds to me like he isn't cut out for community management. It is stressful and hard sometimes, so I get it, but he's going to kill his own site doing this. I did wonder about this before - it seemed like to me he regularly made changes based on feedback on a whim, and these changes were often rushed without much thinking. Needs to know when to pass the baton elsewhere and stick to development, but alas...
The last comments also speak to someone who's probably hiding some contrarian views of his own.
Shame.
-
cOnSeRvaTiVe vOiCeS aRe bEiNg sILeNcED!!
i.e. boohoohoo, I'm facing consequences for my hate speech.
-
It's the engineers doing graphic design but worse: engineers speedrunning social sciences.
-
-
Allowing bigots just means you are one. Rip squabbles.
-
As a wise bartender once said, "If you allow one Nazi, you no longer have a bar. You have a Nazi bar."
-
Thinking everyone you disagree with should be silenced and not allowed in is literally what fascists do. It's what the nazis did. How very "progressive" of you.
Everyone should be allowed to express their opinions and beliefs. Everyone, no matter how much you disagree with them. The onus should be on you to simply not engage with any that you don't want to, be that by simply ignoring them or by using the built in tools of the platform like blocking/ignoring. You're literally asking for censorship of speech.
-
This is a private site not the government. Private entries get to decide what goes as long as they aren't harming a protected class. Macy's e aren't a protected class.
You gave carpet bombed this thread with your fascist and bigoted posts. Absolutely pathetic. You're what these sites don't need. Go back to truth social.
-
Being against censorship = nazi fascist bigoted views now?
Goddamn you guys are so far gone it’s not funny. You don’t even see that you’re the fascists in this situation.
-
-
Is the person you're responding to not also using their free speech?
It's ironic, because you're implying that they shouldn't make comments on their thoughts about this, because the thought of censorship upsets you.
Don't forget that complaining and critiquing are also under the idea of free speech, even if you disagree with the other person.
-
Show me where I said that they shouldn’t be allowed to make comments on their thoughts.
-
-
-
-
LGBT people: "We have a right to exist."
'Free speech absolutists': "Ugh, take your political bullshit someplace else."
No idea how people think this is a valid way to talk about people literally fighting for their right to simply be present in public spaces without people attacking their very being.
-
Grand opening, Grand closing
-
If true: Well, that's the end of that platform I guess. Shame, I liked that there were so many alternatives cropping up.
-
I guess there wasn't enough Squabbling.
-
281 评论