Nobody is gay or transgender because they were groomed for it or seduced into it.

[Politruk]

But regardless of whether it can happen, the fact is...these people are talking to young children about gender, sex and genitals which is wrong in every way.

Who is doing that?

 

[icanhelp1]

They are grooming those kids and attempting to normalize aberrant behavior.

Autogynephilia is becoming more prevalent as more research becomes available.

 

[Politruk]

Autogynephilia is becoming more prevalent as more research becomes available.

It's not caused by the research.

 

[icanhelp1]

1 year ago; time stamp *23:00*

https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/1...n-to-transgenderism-without-parental-consent/

MrBeast Is Introducing Millions Of Children To Transgenderism Without Parental Consent​

By: Eoin Lenihan
April 14, 2023
7 min read

 

[Politruk]

This is because kids are being forced to believe they can be a sex they are not..

Nobody is being forced to believe anything of the kind.

 

[Rightguide]

Autogynephilia is becoming more prevalent as more research becomes available.

You mean some overweight soi boys waking and thinking they grew tits?

 

[Rightguide]

Nobody is being forced to believe anything of the kind.

This is you entering a thread:

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbrobible.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F07%2Fman-farting-fumes.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=788d980a39291bb083ff2c0fd0a2ce1d443c2eb3a9f8652b9327dee3409a97fe&ipo=images

 

[glamorilla]

Who is doing that?

people you're covering for.

 

[Politruk]

people you're covering for.

I'm not covering for anybody. Nobody is doing those things, that's the point. Nobody is grooming.

 

[Rightguide]

VIDEO: Formerly ‘Transgender’ Singer from Iconic Metal Band Detransitioning After Curing His ‘Gender Dysphoria’ — ‘I Am a Man, I Always Was a Man’​

by Cassandra MacDonald Nov. 28, 2024 12:00 pm

Keith Caputo, the formerly “transgender” singer of the iconic metal band Life of Agony, says that he is detransitioning and “always was a man.”​

Caputo began using the name “Mina” and pretending to be a woman in 2011. On Tuesday evening, the singer posted a video to Instagram explaining that he is not a woman and has been off of sex change hormones for six or seven years.

“I will be lovingly living in my divine male self,” Caputo said in the video. “I’ve cured my gender dysphoria. It took many years. A lot of walking through the fire, but I rose above my misunderstandings of my soul and my spirit.”

Caputo added, “I’ve been existing in a different version of myself, a more healed version of myself. I’ve done years of trauma work, plant-medicine therapy.”

“I’m making this video because a lot of people are throwing me shade, and saying I look ugly, and I look like a man, and all that shit. And it’s like, ‘Honey, I am a man, I always was a man.’ You’re just not used to hearing authentic people speak.”

More here: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...der-singer-iconic-metal-band-detransitioning/

Seeing the light and accepting reality, like a man.

 

[Politruk]

VIDEO: Formerly ‘Transgender’ Singer from Iconic Metal Band Detransitioning After Curing His ‘Gender Dysphoria’ — ‘I Am a Man, I Always Was a Man’​

by Cassandra MacDonald Nov. 28, 2024 12:00 pm

Keith Caputo, the formerly “transgender” singer of the iconic metal band Life of Agony, says that he is detransitioning and “always was a man.”​

Caputo began using the name “Mina” and pretending to be a woman in 2011. On Tuesday evening, the singer posted a video to Instagram explaining that he is not a woman and has been off of sex change hormones for six or seven years.

“I will be lovingly living in my divine male self,” Caputo said in the video. “I’ve cured my gender dysphoria. It took many years. A lot of walking through the fire, but I rose above my misunderstandings of my soul and my spirit.”

Caputo added, “I’ve been existing in a different version of myself, a more healed version of myself. I’ve done years of trauma work, plant-medicine therapy.”

“I’m making this video because a lot of people are throwing me shade, and saying I look ugly, and I look like a man, and all that shit. And it’s like, ‘Honey, I am a man, I always was a man.’ You’re just not used to hearing authentic people speak.”

More here: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...der-singer-iconic-metal-band-detransitioning/

Seeing the light and accepting reality, like a man.

Nothing to suggest anybody groomed or seduced Caputo at either stage.

 

[YDB95]

Personal 'feelings' are not science.

My point exactly, and this is perhaps the best score-on-your-own-goal I've ever seen from you. Which is saying a lot.

Biological men and women do not need surgery, counseling or affirmation for being their biological sex. Your own argument proves my point.

It absolutely does not. Once again you just show you don't understand the science and you are also completely unwilling to learn it.

My logical argument and stance is not affecting you in any way whatsoever.

True, because I'm not trans. It does hurt transpeople who only want to be their true selves, and who are not hurting you in any way.

Untrue. Peer pressure and what's trendy can push the softest most malleable generation ever seen to do just about anything. At least to the point of experimentation.

If that were even a little bit true, then I'd have fallen victim to it myself when I was a 12 year old boy enduring severe bullying at school, essentially for the crime of not being macho. If that experience didn't make someone "become trans" as it were, nothing ever will.

Also, the counter point is this. The groomers you're defending say "well these girls think they're girls and boys think they're boys because its how they're raised and social conditioning etc..." so now they want to try their form of conditioning. If its true that most people are 'straight' because of conditioning, then the opposite can be true with time and effort.

1. The people you insist on calling "groomers" would never say what you put in quotes there, because that phrasing would be extremely offensive to the people they're ostensibly supporting.
2. Most people are not straight because of conditioning. I didn't need any conditioning to notice Katie from French class in her beautiful gypsy costume in eighth grade, I assure you!

But regardless of whether it can happen, the fact is...these people are talking to young children about gender, sex and genitals which is wrong in every way.

Age-appropriate sex education is a good thing. You see, children are going to be curious about their own bodies, and especially the parts grownups tell them not to talk about in public. Heck, when I was a kid, I knew a girl who knew more slang terms for penis and vagina than many adults do, but she didn't know the real words. I once heard her reading a book on where babies come from, and when she got to them, she said "penss and viggina". Would you want your kids to be that ignorant?

The pathetic thing is, you probably would.

And most GLBT people will tell you they knew as young as age five or six that they weren't straight. Are you saying you want adults to let them believe they're a bunch of sick freaks? Again, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.

But I'd expect no less from the pedo party.

You mean the party that just nominated Matt Gaetz for AG?

 

[Politruk]

In Gary Jennings' historical novel The Journeyer, Marco Polo passes through a town in Persia called Kashan, which is famous for its good-looking boys, who are typically raised and trained to be rich men's bed-boys. (Because that is a route to upward social mobility, in a time and place where few other routes are conceivable.) The process involves sleeping with an ivory device in one's rectum, and being buggered by one's elder brother as often as he can manage it.

THAT is grooming.

Hanging a rainbow flag in a classroom is not grooming.

Having books with gay characters in the school library is not grooming.

 

[TastySuckToy]

My point exactly, and this is perhaps the best score-on-your-own-goal I've ever seen from you. Which is saying a lot.

Transgender ideology is one based upon personal opinions and beliefs, not science.

It absolutely does not. Once again you just show you don't understand the science and you are also completely unwilling to learn it.

Transgender 'science' has as much validity to it as 'creationism science'.

True, because I'm not trans. It does hurt transpeople who only want to be their true selves, and who are not hurting you in any way.

What hurts them? And I never claimed transpeople hurt me in any way.

 

[YDB95]

Transgender ideology is one based upon personal opinions and beliefs, not science.

Not true. It is based on science, you're just choosing to remain ignorant of that science.

Transgender 'science' has as much validity to it as 'creationism science'.

How would you know that when you so clearly know absolutely nothing about it (and seem to be proud of that)?

What hurts them?

You don't understand why transphobia hurts transpeople? If you honestly don't get it, I don't know that I can help you.

And I never claimed transpeople hurt me in any way.

Then exactly why are you opposed to affording them the respect and dignity due all people?

 

[Politruk]

Transgender ideology is one based upon personal opinions and beliefs, not science.

It's based on science.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Not true. It is based on science, you're just choosing to remain ignorant of that science.

What is the science you think I'm ignoring?

How would you know that when you so clearly know absolutely nothing about it (and seem to be proud of that)?

See above.

You don't understand why transphobia hurts transpeople?

If someone is scared of something, that fear doesn't mean said fear hurts that which is feared.

If someone is scared of spiders, I don't claim the fear of spiders hurts spiders.

Then exactly why are you opposed to affording them the respect and dignity due all people?

What respect and dignity am I not affording them?

I've repeatedly said people are free to self identify however they wish for any reason they wish.

 

[YDB95]

What is the science you think I'm ignoring?

Politruk just gave you a link.

If someone is scared of something, that fear doesn't mean said fear hurts that which is feared.

If someone is scared of spiders, I don't claim the fear of spiders hurts spiders.

Eh, you're right. The problem isn't that you're afraid, it's that you're an asshole.

What respect and dignity am I not affording them?

I've repeatedly said people are free to self identify however they wish for any reason they wish.

You have also repeatedly claimed their experience somehow isn't real, including right here in this thread.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Politruk just gave you a link.

Feel free to present it yourself, rather than appealing to posts of others I have on ignore.

Eh, you're right. The problem isn't that you're afraid, it's that you're an asshole.

Notice how you didn't ask or give a shit if I identify as an asshole?

Isn't it interesting how you give me an identifying label at whim without cause or concern (especially a label most would agree is meant to be offensive), but if that same principle is applied to others in your preferred special groups, sudddenly it's a 'problem'.

Funny how that works, isn't it? The next time you call anyone a name, title or identify them as something you didn't explicitly ask them first if they agree with it or not, remind yourself you don't actually give a fuck about people's self identity. You only conveniently claim so when it favours a particular ideology you agree with.

You have also repeatedly claimed their experience somehow isn't real, including right here in this thread.

I don't deny a transgender person's experience may seem 'real' to them, anymore than I would deny a theist's experience with 'god' is 'real' to them.

Personal experience doesn't prove anything, otherwise I could just appeal to my non experience with transgenderism as a 'argument' against it existing at all.

 

[YDB95]

Feel free to present it yourself, rather than appealing to posts of others I have on ignore.

That's not my problem, and honestly, I don't think you'd read it if I provided it anyway.

Notice how you didn't ask or give a shit if I identify as an asshole?

Isn't it interesting how you give me an identifying label at whim without cause or concern (especially a label most would agree is meant to be offensive), but if that same principle is applied to others in your preferred special groups, sudddenly it's a 'problem'.

The difference is that I'm basing my assessment of you on your actions and your attitude, whereas you are basing yours on the way these people were born, and on who they fundamentally are.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

Indeed.

The next time you call anyone a name, title or identify them as something you didn't explicitly ask them first if they agree with it or not, remind yourself you don't actually give a fuck about people's self identity. You only conveniently claim so when it favours a particular ideology you agree with.

Not true (and I could comment on your frequent use of the term "Democrat Party" here too, but why bother?). I'm sure even you can see there is a difference between judging someone on the way they have acted repeatedly, and on something that is a fundamental part of who they are.

I don't deny a transgender person's experience may seem 'real' to them, anymore than I would deny a theist's experience with 'god' is 'real' to them.

Yes you do, every time you deny the science behind it. That's the issue here.

 

[TastySuckToy]

That's not my problem, and honestly, I don't think you'd read it if I provided it anyway.

Then don't claim I'm ignoring something when you refuse to present it.

The difference is that I'm basing my assessment of you on your actions and your attitude,

That's perfectly valid response, whether I agree with your assessment or not.

whereas you are basing yours on the way these people were born, and on who they fundamentally are.

Yes, people are born in ways they cannot control and their attributes will dictate how other perceive them. I will identify a midget as a midget, no matter how much they insist they identify as a giant.

Welcome to the real world.

The difference here being is I don't consider being identified as a man or a woman as inherently offensive, regardless of whether the one I'm identifying as such agrees or not.

Calling someone an asshole is, by most accounts, a delibrate attempt to be offensive to the one being called so.

Not true (and I could comment on your frequent use of the term "Democrat Party" here too, but why bother?). I'm sure even you can see there is a difference between judging someone on the way they have acted repeatedly, and on something that is a fundamental part of who they are.

How someone acts is something that is a fundamental part of who they are.

Yes you do, every time you deny the science behind it. That's the issue here.

I can't deny something you refuse to present, with you refusing to even do so in your own words as an argument.

 

[YDB95]

Yes, people are born in ways they cannot control and their attributes will dictate how other perceive them. I will identify a midget as a midget, no matter how much they insist they identify as a giant.

That you believe this is a reasonable analogy to trans people really says it all.

The difference here being is I don't consider being identified as a man or a woman as inherently offensive, regardless of whether the one I'm identifying as such agrees or not.

It's not your place to decide what other people find offensive. And it is offensive to insist on referring to people as something fundamentally different from what they really are. When you travel overseas, I'll bet people often mistake you for an American. Nothing wrong with being American, but if you're anything like any other Canadian I've ever met, you don't like it one bit.

Calling someone an asshole is, by most accounts, a delibrate attempt to be offensive to the one being called so.

So is misgendering someone, which is effectively what you are doing here.

How someone acts is something that is a fundamental part of who they are.

Not in the same way that their gender identity is.

I can't deny something you refuse to present, with you refusing to even do so in your own words as an argument.

True, but you could show some sign that you're willing to at least educate yourself on this topic, and you have repeatedly made it abundantly clear that you will not.

 

[ericalauren]

I wish that I had had at least one queer/trans mentor or role model when I was a kiddo.

 

[TastySuckToy]

That you believe this is a reasonable analogy to trans people really says it all.

It's a perfect example of self identity not being the determination for reality.

It's not your place to decide what other people find offensive.

Correct. I never tell people what to find offensive. People are free to be offended or not by whatever they want.

And it is offensive to insist on referring to people as something fundamentally different from what they really are.

It's not your place to decide what other people find offensive.

See how that works yet?

When you travel overseas, I'll bet people often mistake you for an American. Nothing wrong with being American, but if you're anything like any other Canadian I've ever met, you don't like it one bit.

Strange example. I wouldn't care and would only bother correcting them if it was prudent for some reason.

So is misgendering someone, which is effectively what you are doing here.

If a biological male tells me they identify as a woman, I refuse to misgender them by calling them a woman. They're still perfectly free to identify that way all they want.

Not in the same way that their gender identity is.

I don't care what a persona identifies as or in what way. I will only identify them that way if I agree with it.

True, but you could show some sign that you're willing to at least educate yourself on this topic, and you have repeatedly made it abundantly clear that you will not.

Actually I have, and your unwillingness to even try presenting your vague claim about 'the science' indicates to me you already know I'll easily refute it.

 

[YDB95]

Actually I have, and your unwillingness to even try presenting your vague claim about 'the science' indicates to me you already know I'll easily refute it.

I have never seen you "easily refute" anything. You always just argue that the experts could be wrong and ignore all the context.