Lord Ratner Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 1 hour ago, Biff_T said: I'm not sure the wokes (intentionally plural) know what they want. They appear to spout nonsense just to make normal humans mad. Like children. It's complete insanity to believe what they're pushing. History will not be kind to them. They are a cult of fat chicks. Nothing more. I know exactly what they want. Meaning and money. They spent decades fighting the good fight, and the cause was righteous. Problem is, eventually they ran out of victims. Now the people who made their living as professional activists when activists were needed (Al Sharpton, Gloria Steinem, etc) are facing economic doom if the battle is over, and the younger progressives grew up believing they would carry the torch, only to reach adulthood prepared for a war that already ended. It benefits both groups to "find" victims, mentally and financially, so that's exactly what they do. But the only people you can inaccurately cast as victims are the mentally broken, and so we see the "homeless" drug addicts, those with gender dysmorphia, women who confabulate ridiculous fantasies of sexual abuse (e.g. the Kavanaugh accuser), men who are attracted to children, all become the oppressed. It's not because any of these activists actually care about these "victims;" they want fame and money and found a way to get it. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 Yep…the progressives are going after your kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 2 hours ago, HeloDude said: Yep…the progressives are going after your kids. Maybe hard to believe, but I may have an unpopular opinion on this. Raising my kids was the most incredibly difficult thing I've done. I was working an airline job and guard job to include TDYs, deployments, etc while trying to be a decent father. The amount of thought and mental churning it took to anticipate, recognize, and mitigate all the potential pitfalls in a modern child's (especially girl's) life often seemed overwhelming. I have a very strong wife and immediate/exteneded family who live nearby. Fortunately, we were able to shape these young ones into an even better version of ourselves. Now there's another generation beginning and he's starting life with an even bigger advantage and more people to help guide him. You can't remove the danger from a child's life, but you can prepare them to confront it. That takes an extraordinary effort today. Those countless hours at the dinner table, sitting next to them on the bed talking, sitting on bleachers until my ass was numb, Googling calculus answers, etc, was painful, but a family legacy is the most important thing to me. I can't imagine attempting to concern myself the children of others to the extent that I care about mine. That's their job and so many are failing. If a family or society fails to produce mentally and physically fit young people who are wholly unable to produce the strong family dynamic required to go forth and multiply, those people eventually cease to exist. All I have to do is wait. I'lll help where I can, but I am under no obligation to drag the weak through life. If your child succumbs to these dangers, where does the responsibility lie? With the things you can't control (danger) or the things you can (preparation)? If you're someone who becomes conflicted about who you are and believe you need to change your body, I support whatever makes you happy. The chances of you outlasting my family and friends are slim. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 6 hours ago, gearhog said: If you're someone who becomes conflicted about who you are and believe you need to change your body, I support whatever makes you happy. The chances of you outlasting my family and friends are slim. I don’t think young children have the mental ability to determine what’s going on in their bodies so much that a medical provider believes they should be given puberty blockers or be mutilated. I believe then that these vulnerable children should be protected as much as possible. There’s plenty of things we don’t allow children to do just because they want to…and yet with this issue, we have adults (both parents and medical providers) pushing these children to desire such things. It’s unbelievable. Once they’re an adult and can do anything else legally (to include drink alcohol) then sure, they can do whatever they want. This is about protecting young children from those who wish to harm them. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokin Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 If my adult neighbor drank a full bottle of jack every night, I'd try to convince him not to and help him out of his situation, but at the end of the day it's his choice and I can't stop him. If my neighbor's 12 year old kid drank a bottle of jack every night with the encouragement of their parents and doctor, that is child abuse. The parents and doctor should go to jail and the kid should be placed in a foster family where they have a chance at life. Life altering surgeries because they have been pushed into or allowed to continue in a mental delusion is no different. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrizzell Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 If you're someone who becomes conflicted about who you are and believe you need to change your body, I support whatever makes you happy. The chances of you outlasting my family and friends are slim. There are states that you can’t get a tattoo under the age of 18, even with parental consent. As a serious nation, if we allowing children to determine whether they’re a boy or a girls, we have failed our youth. My oldest boy loved Black Panther, wore costume everyday. I didn’t say “well time to move to Wakanda” he knows who he is. The hard part of being a parent is saying no and protecting them. Not allowing children to proceed down a path with life altering outcomes. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Smokin said: If my adult neighbor drank a full bottle of jack every night, I'd try to convince him not to and help him out of his situation, but at the end of the day it's his choice and I can't stop him. If my neighbor's 12 year old kid drank a bottle of jack every night with the encouragement of their parents and doctor, that is child abuse. The parents and doctor should go to jail and the kid should be placed in a foster family where they have a chance at life. Life altering surgeries because they have been pushed into or allowed to continue in a mental delusion is no different. That's kind of my point. What is the goal of preventing gender affirming care? Are we creating better people? They're likely to be a dreg of society with or without a penis. Any legislation on gender affirming care addresses the end result of harmful or neglectful parenting and social norms, not the destructive conditions that lead to mental illness. So now if you want to address the root causes, you have to create nanny state laws that allow for seizure of kids from homes and laws that prevent exposure to whatever the state deems dangerous. I don't like that either. The people who are least equipped (and being raised) to deal with modern life are self-sterilizing and effectively ending their genetic lineage. And... they're happy to do it. And... likely willing to become angry/violent if not allowed. Who are we to deny their pursuit of happiness? Why not let it play out? I'm willing to speak with your neighbor's kid and list all the reasons why he shouldn't touch the hot stove, but if he still want's to.... It's not on me. It's on his parents. What I am against, is any sort of outside funding. Do what you want, but not with my taxes or insurance premiums. If the parents have to work overtime for months on end to have their kid's tits chopped off, I think the whole dynamic might change. Edited March 12 by gearhog 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 24 minutes ago, gearhog said: That's kind of my point. What is the goal of preventing gender affirming care? Are we creating better people? They're likely to be a dreg of society with or without a penis. Any legislation on gender affirming care addresses the end result of harmful or neglectful parenting and social norms, not the destructive conditions that lead to mental illness. So now if you want to address the root causes, you have to create nanny state laws that allow for seizure of kids from homes and laws that prevent exposure to whatever the state deems dangerous. I don't like that either. The people who are least equipped (and being raised) to deal with modern life are self-sterilizing and effectively ending their genetic lineage. And... they're happy to do it. And... likely willing to become angry/violent if not allowed. Who are we to deny their pursuit of happiness? Why not let it play out? I'm willing to speak with your neighbor's kid and list all the reasons why he shouldn't touch the hot stove, but if he still want's to.... It's not on me. It's on his parents. What I am against, is any sort of outside funding. Do what you want, but not with my taxes or insurance premiums. If the parents have to work overtime for months on end to have their kid's tits chopped off, I think the whole dynamic might change. The vast majority of these children grow out of it, so why push life alternating medication and/or surgery when it’s not needed? I remember wanting to do some really stupid things when I was a child and I’m glad my parents guided me in the right direction for the most part. And none of my silly desires would have had any extreme/lasting effects such as what I mentioned above. As for creating a nanny state in the home (which is already being done but we can argue each issue separately on their own merits if you’d like), what I’m suggesting is that you make it illegal for medical providers to prescribe such medication/perform such surgeries…at least without the minimum of an extremely high bar, which obviously isn’t being done today. We need to protect children from their confusion, not support it. As for the philosophy that they’ll just be screwed ip later in life and my family won’t, then that means we shouldn’t have any protections for children…and as libertarian as I am, that is just something that doesn’t sit well with me as children cannot consent to much of anything given their intelligence level at their young age. From the article mentioned below: “A psychiatrist who has presided over youth gender transition treatments for more than a decade says “four out of five” gender-questioning children eventually accept their bodies if no medical interventions are carried out.” https://nypost.com/2023/02/22/four-out-of-five-kids-who-question-their-gender-grow-out-of-it-trans-expert/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFM this Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 2 hours ago, gearhog said: The people who are least equipped (and being raised) to deal with modern life are self-sterilizing and effectively ending their genetic lineage. And... they're happy to do it. So, eugenics is cool again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 3 hours ago, BFM this said: So, eugenics is cool again? Huh? No offense, but you don't appear to understand the meaning of the word. Eugenics is a deliberate intervention in another person's choices regarding reproduction. I'm advocating for exactly the opposite. Let the family decide and stay out of it. To be clear, I don't think children are currently allowed to be making these decisions without the concurrence of the parents. I would agree that kids should not be deciding for themselves without parental involvement, but isn't that already the law? How many issues do we want the state to supersede the parents? Riding a dirt bike can be a life-altering decision for a child, going swimming, flying to Nashville with family in a GA aircraft, as well as many other things. I had a few students who SIE'd from pilot training. Why would I want to force them to remain? If someone and their family wants to SIE from the procreating population - so? Go live your childless life and disappear. If someone is considering self-amputation, they're 100% going to be unhappy in life either way. It is better for them to blame themselves than you. Does anyone here actually personally know a child transitioning? Have you spoken with them or their family and still want to circumvent their wishes and impose yours via legislation? I bet the answer is "no". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViperMan Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 The whole "trans" issue breaks down along two lines. The first category is a mental (or emotional) disorder. In these cases, it doesn't matter what age you are. Less than 18, over 18, who gives a shit. If you are a person who actually perceives yourself to be a different sex than what you are, that is a mental issue of some form. Period. In this case, there is no circumstance in which "consent" can be obtained or given. So no surgery or other so-called form of treatment not specifically aimed to mitigate the mental component of the problem is appropriate. The second is a smaller category of people who are of sound mind but who derive some sort of sexual gratification from presenting or "transforming" themselves into a semblance of the opposite sex. If these people want to obtain genital plastic surgery, then yeah, sure, fine. More power to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViperMan Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 8 hours ago, gearhog said: The people who are least equipped (and being raised) to deal with modern life are self-sterilizing and effectively ending their genetic lineage. And... they're happy to do it. And... likely willing to become angry/violent if not allowed. Who are we to deny their pursuit of happiness? Why not let it play out? This line of reasoning / justification is retarded. Society imposes innumerable restrictions to prevent individuals from hurting themselves, and beyond that, there are numerous other safety nets to prevent people from damaging themselves in permanent ways due to mental issues because we have decided that human life has innate value...but I suppose you're comfortable with all the service-related suicides that occur each and every day? This decision entails certain consequences, among them, that you don't allow mentally damaged (healing) people to destroy themselves. Many (most) people who suffer from this ailment return to normal if given the time, space, and opportunity. That's why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 (edited) 2 hours ago, ViperMan said: This line of reasoning / justification is retarded. Society imposes innumerable restrictions to prevent individuals from hurting themselves, and beyond that, there are numerous other safety nets to prevent people from damaging themselves in permanent ways due to mental issues because we have decided that human life has innate value...but I suppose you're comfortable with all the service-related suicides that occur each and every day? This decision entails certain consequences, among them, that you don't allow mentally damaged (healing) people to destroy themselves. Many (most) people who suffer from this ailment return to normal if given the time, space, and opportunity. That's why. You're making quite the leap by intentionally conflating gender transitioning with veteran suicide. That's a retarded line of reasoning. People who undergo gender transition aren't doing so in order to hurt or end their lives. What would be the point of that? They're doing it because in their own heads, it'll improve their lives. I don't agree with it, either. But should your judgement regarding what a child and his/her parents decide to do with their bodies supersede theirs? They argue consistently that they go through the process to avoid resorting to suicide or self-harm. Of course life has innate value, as does the right for self-determination. Who are you to tell a family what they believe is making life more livable is actually harm? 3 hours ago, ViperMan said: The whole "trans" issue breaks down along two lines. The first category is a mental (or emotional) disorder. In these cases, it doesn't matter what age you are. Less than 18, over 18, who gives a shit. If you are a person who actually perceives yourself to be a different sex than what you are, that is a mental issue of some form. Period. In this case, there is no circumstance in which "consent" can be obtained or given. So no surgery or other so-called form of treatment not specifically aimed to mitigate the mental component of the problem is appropriate. The second is a smaller category of people who are of sound mind but who derive some sort of sexual gratification from presenting or "transforming" themselves into a semblance of the opposite sex. If these people want to obtain genital plastic surgery, then yeah, sure, fine. More power to them. Two categories, eh? The first is a mental disorder from thinking you’re the opposite sex, and the second is completely different: sexual gratification from transitioning to the opposite sex, which is cool. I hope you're making yourself available to explain that distinction for each person who wants to transition, because I'm pretty sure no one else can. lol Edited March 13 by gearhog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 hours ago, gearhog said: Huh? No offense, but you don't appear to understand the meaning of the word. Eugenics is a deliberate intervention in another person's choices regarding reproduction. I'm advocating for exactly the opposite. Let the family decide and stay out of it. To be clear, I don't think children are currently allowed to be making these decisions without the concurrence of the parents. I would agree that kids should not be deciding for themselves without parental involvement, but isn't that already the law? How many issues do we want the state to supersede the parents? Riding a dirt bike can be a life-altering decision for a child, going swimming, flying to Nashville with family in a GA aircraft, as well as many other things. I had a few students who SIE'd from pilot training. Why would I want to force them to remain? If someone and their family wants to SIE from the procreating population - so? Go live your childless life and disappear. If someone is considering self-amputation, they're 100% going to be unhappy in life either way. It is better for them to blame themselves than you. Does anyone here actually personally know a child transitioning? Have you spoken with them or their family and still want to circumvent their wishes and impose yours via legislation? I bet the answer is "no". I have a feeling if a parent allows their 7 year old on a dirt bike and the kid kills themself then that parent could be charged with negligence, or worse. And we also don’t allow kids to get drunk at age 9, regardless of what their parents desires. I could give plenty of other examples. As for knowing any trans kids, I also don’t personally know any children who were the victims of statutory rape, but I know that it’s not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 11 hours ago, HeloDude said: I have a feeling if a parent allows their 7 year old on a dirt bike and the kid kills themself then that parent could be charged with negligence, or worse. And we also don’t allow kids to get drunk at age 9, regardless of what their parents desires. I could give plenty of other examples. As for knowing any trans kids, I also don’t personally know any children who were the victims of statutory rape, but I know that it’s not good. Sorry, man. Not true. You're using the example of the dirt bike, yet there are literally thousands of kids competing in 7 year old classes at races around the country. Do you support banning that, also? Kids are allowed to do dangerous things that can either make them happy or harm them horribly. That's life. There is a laws against minors and alcohol, but parents spend hundreds of billions of dollars drugging their kids in other ways with an incredible amount of OTC and prescription drugs. They're encouraged to do it, and often times required by the state to do it. In addition to gender transitioning medication, what other medications would you ban? Why would you just pick one? Lots of kids live in a household with guns, and some of them shoot themselves. Should the guns be illegal? Should the ATF be allowed to inspect your home and make sure they'll locked up? My point when asking if you knew any was to say that if it weren't for the magic window in your hand, you would never know this was a problem. If it weren't for the magic window in everyone else's hand - the problem would be non-existent. Your perception of the frequency and severity of the problem is radically skewed. And even if someone did know one of these kids, I guarantee that they have never contacted the family and asked to discuss the matter. Everyone wants to bypass that step make someone else work to create a new law of the land for everyone that suits their worldview. I admire your compassion. Always offer help. But if it is refused, let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 23 minutes ago, gearhog said: My point when asking if you knew any was to say that if it weren't for the magic window in your hand, you would never know this was a problem. If it weren't for the magic window in everyone else's hand - the problem would be non-existent. Your perception of the frequency and severity of the problem is radically skewed. And even if someone did know one of these kids, I guarantee that they have never contacted the family and asked to discuss the matter. Just so I understand the argument you’re making, and correct me if I’m wrong: People shouldn’t take a stand on an issue they deem important if they don’t have first hand experience/know someone directly dealing with said issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 hour ago, HeloDude said: Just so I understand the argument you’re making, and correct me if I’m wrong: People shouldn’t take a stand on an issue they deem important if they don’t have first hand experience/know someone directly dealing with said issue? Absolutely not. First, this is not what I would call "taking a stand". If someone were helping to write language of the legislation they hope to enact and sending it to their representatives, protesting in the street, actively preventing access, going door to door, then I would say a person has real conviction in their beliefs and were taking a stand. We're just debating about allowing the choices of people we've never met nor seen and have who near zero impact on our lives. Both of us should be able to argue our respective positions and what we believe to be right and wrong. Freedom of speech. If you feel you can make someone understand the logic of what you believe and change the mind of a parent or child who may be considering this, I 100% support you and I'll argue alongside you. But even after we've educated them, they stand up and say don't agree and are going to proceed anyway, would you physically restrain them? There are natural laws governing this sort of thing. Let them work. If and when this "crisis" comes to an end, it won't be due to legislation, it'll because enough people did or did not get the result they expected, and the word got around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lloyd christmas Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) The starting point in the conversation should be: Why at this point in history are human beings, at an incredibly higher rate, having these mental issues? It’s clearly a cultural phenomenon or societal issue and not biological. The lack of parenting leads to kids raising themselves under heavy heavy influence by a new phenomenon - social media. The adults should be addressing this and not condoning or supporting it. Especially, medical providers. But, it’s big business and generates huge sums of money. Edited March 14 by lloyd christmas 5 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) There’s a balance to what I’m about to say, but a while ago people went through life acknowledging that everyone has shit happen to them, has a hard day/week/month/year, etc. People sucked it up and persevered, because there was no other good option. The weak ones didn’t make it. And that was life. Nowadays, there’s so much push for therapy and talking about feelings, and it’s OK to be sad and confused and blah blah - how about sack up and get on with life. I mean the first thing I said, which is there’s a balance. I’m not anti-mental health and taking care of it. But when I see large majorities of people not being able to handle their fragile emotions, I have to say most of them just need to suck it up and stop being weak little candy asses. But they won’t, because our society and culture enables them to be weak. Leave the mental health work for those who truly need it, and not for every swinging dick who’s simply a pussy because they were never taught an ounce of resiliency. Edited March 14 by brabus 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RASH Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 There’s a balance to what I’m about to say, but a while ago people went through life acknowledging that everyone has shit happen to them, has a hard day/week/month/year, etc. People sucked it up and persevered, because there was no other good option. The weak ones didn’t make it. And that was life. Nowadays, there’s so much push for therapy and talking about feelings, and it’s OK to be sad and confused and blah blah - how about sack up and get on with life. I mean the first thing I said, which is there’s a balance. I’m not anti-mental health and taking care of it. But when I see large majorities of people not being able to handle their fragile emotions, I have to say most of them just need to suck it up and stop being weak little candy asses. But they won’t, because our society and culture enables them to be weak. Leave the mental health work for those who truly need it, and not for every swinging dick who’s simply a because they were never taught an ounce of resiliency. YOU are responsible for your lot in life. No one else! Man up and determine your destination!Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pitt4401 Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-outcomes/ I remember I just about fell out of my chair when I read this piece of actual journalism from a large outlet. It's the only instance of honest discussion I can find when discussing the proliferation of trans issues. It really shows how much of a bind a person can be in, if they've bought the propaganda, made the transition only to learn virtue signaling physicians permanently altered they body into a shoddy copy of something they'll never truly be. I have to chuckle when folks assume the absolute inviolability of the trans identity. It's like these same folks can't fathom that yes, some young people dabble in things, and sometimes dabble right back out (are we still allowed to call temporary college lesbians 'four year queers'?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standby Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 21 hours ago, brabus said: I have to say most of them just need to suck it up and stop being weak little candy asses I agree with everything you said, but had to call particular attention to this because it brings back such good memories of a time where people were NOT the types of individuals you called out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Joe Biden mourns death of Nex Benedict, LGBTQ+ teen who died by suicide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearhog Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 1 hour ago, M2 said: Joe Biden mourns death of Nex Benedict, LGBTQ+ teen who died by suicide But I was told it was a homocide by bigoted transphobe hate group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 The truth is whatever the Ministry of Truth, aka the media, says it is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now