TDT 4: What the $#@! is a "womxn", anyways?

[Saciu]

There could be other reasons that they were deleted. Is there are solid way to determine who deleted them? We still don't have much context.

I didn't know you could delete someone else's tweets.

I've already explained that I hardly know how Twitter works. It wasn't specified which tweets were deleted. Is all the evidence we have that screenshot of the tweet?

[Vassenor]

I didn't know you could delete someone else's tweets.

I've already explained that I hardly know how Twitter works. It wasn't specified which tweets were deleted. Is all the evidence we have that screenshot of the tweet?

Are we really going to go through this dance because you don't like the idea that someone who thinks someone is only truly trans if they're cis-passing might be hateful?

[Saciu]

What seems to have happened was that stef's identity was mistaken. It was definitely a mistake on her part, and quite frankly reckless, but it doesn't make her garbage. I imagine that Blaire deleted the tweet as a retraction of her message. I suspect that Blaire is now blocked by stef, so she couldn't apologise directly. There does seem to be some suspicious stuff with stef changing her Twitter username though. I don't know if that's disassociation from a different person, or changing identity to avoid prosecution. I imagine that Blaire will talk about this eventually, though. That's what she almost always does. She'll give her own perspective, and then the two sides will be comparable. When just one side has spoken, it's often rash to jump straight to a verdict. If you publicise this more, she'll react more quickly.

[Saciu]

I've already explained that I hardly know how Twitter works. It wasn't specified which tweets were deleted. Is all the evidence we have that screenshot of the tweet?

Are we really going to go through this dance because you don't like the idea that someone who thinks someone is only truly trans if they're cis-passing might be hateful?

You've misunderstood. She, along with most other transmeds, doesn't believe what you think they believe. You don't understand transmedicalism, so I don't think there's much point discussing further at this point.

[Vassenor]

Are we really going to go through this dance because you don't like the idea that someone who thinks someone is only truly trans if they're cis-passing might be hateful?

You've misunderstood. She, along with most other transmeds, doesn't believe what you think they believe. You don't understand transmedicalism, so I don't think there's much point discussing further at this point.

So let's see her explaining what her views actually are then.

[Saciu]

You've misunderstood. She, along with most other transmeds, doesn't believe what you think they believe. You don't understand transmedicalism, so I don't think there's much point discussing further at this point.

So let's see her explaining what her views actually are then.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDmCBK ... qgsL4-3C8Q Just look. Look and you'll see what she thinks really quite quickly.

[Vassenor]

So let's see her explaining what her views actually are then.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDmCBK ... qgsL4-3C8Q Just look. Look and you'll see what she thinks really quite quickly.

Or you could actually explain them rather than blind linkdumping.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDmCBK ... qgsL4-3C8Q Just look. Look and you'll see what she thinks really quite quickly.

Or you could actually explain them rather than blind linkdumping.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o_yuAuzl6Q&t=2307s

She somewhat explains her positions in this video, though it is long.

[Vassenor]

Or you could actually explain them rather than blind linkdumping.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o_yuAuzl6Q&t=2307s

She somewhat explains her positions in this video, though it is long.

So your response to a request for someone to actually explain a thing in writing rather than just blind linkdumping is to blind linkdump.

[Saciu]

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDmCBK ... qgsL4-3C8Q Just look. Look and you'll see what she thinks really quite quickly.

Or you could actually explain them rather than blind linkdumping.

I'm shit at explaining things. It's appropriate to give you a collection of what she thinks.

[Saciu]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o_yuAuzl6Q&t=2307s

She somewhat explains her positions in this video, though it is long.

So your response to a request for someone to actually explain a thing in writing rather than just blind linkdumping is to blind linkdump.

It's not hard to watch the video unless you have myopia, akinetopsia, or some other medical disorder.

[Vassenor]

So your response to a request for someone to actually explain a thing in writing rather than just blind linkdumping is to blind linkdump.

It's not hard to watch the video unless you have myopia, akinetopsia, or some other medical disorder.

And yet you can't summarise that video in text.

[Auzkhia]

Also, in this thread, please remember to take this advice: be nice, be respectful.

Bold words for someone who doubts nonbinary people. You ever heard of the phrase "trans rights aren't a debate"? This is one case, my validity isn't up for debate, accept me for who I am, and then let's talk.

I think we're done here, unless we want to challenge ourselves to a banging our heads against brick walls.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Also, in this thread, please remember to take this advice: be nice, be respectful.

Bold words for someone who doubts nonbinary people. You ever heard of the phrase "trans rights aren't a debate"? This is one case, my validity isn't up for debate, accept me for who I am, and then let's talk.

I think we're done here, unless we want to challenge ourselves to a banging our heads against brick walls.

Assuming Saciu even doubts nb people, you can still be unsure about nb people and be polite and respectful.

[Hediacrana]

I very much regret this thread got filled with bullshit while I was asleep and at work.

Thank you for once again putting in the time and effort to respond to a load of that stuff - it's very much appreciated.

Yes, some of the more hardcore transmedicalists refer to some NB people as trenders. I think some people who say they're trans aren't, most of whom are people pretending to be trans but presenting entirely as their birth sex and being completely comfortable that way. What transtrender actually means is, quite simply, one who pretends to be transgender because they see it as trendy.

And its a bullshit narrative, just like the "transgender bathroom rapist".

One of the most disappointing aspects of public life is that such bullshit narratives about othered people are so incredibly resilient.

Honest question - how does one effectively counter those narratives IRL? I'm not inclined to believe debates and facts really help to change minds, because people in general hate to admit their wrong, and because tribalist loyalties tend to immunize people against facts. But what else can be done?

(I'm talking IRL here because politicized conversations in online forum discussions are an entirely different thing)

[Dumb Ideologies]

Also, in this thread, please remember to take this advice: be nice, be respectful.

Bold words for someone who doubts nonbinary people. You ever heard of the phrase "trans rights aren't a debate"? This is one case, my validity isn't up for debate, accept me for who I am, and then let's talk.

I think we're done here, unless we want to challenge ourselves to a banging our heads against brick walls.

This is a bit of a Jedi mind trick of a post. "This is not the debate you are looking for!"

When someone doubts something they can't be required to abandon that doubt out of "politeness" before any discussion of that doubt can take place.

You don't want to participate in that debate, and that's your prerogative, but that doesn't mean there isn't a debate or that the opponent disappears in a puff of logic.

[Auzkhia]

Bold words for someone who doubts nonbinary people. You ever heard of the phrase "trans rights aren't a debate"? This is one case, my validity isn't up for debate, accept me for who I am, and then let's talk.

I think we're done here, unless we want to challenge ourselves to a banging our heads against brick walls.

Assuming Saciu even doubts nb people, you can still be unsure about nb people and be polite and respectful.

Or they would experience gender euphoria, or remain experiencing nothing at all.

The plural of anecdote is not data. And that sounds like a you problem, tbh. I'm trans and proud of it. Yeah, dysphoria sucks, living in a place where it would be vastly easier to be a cishet person sucks, but... nothing I can do about that right now, so why let it get me down that I'm a trans lesbian in the first place?

From everything I've seen, "transtrenders" is mostly just a derogatory way to refer to NB people.

If you have gender euphoria as one gender, you'll have gender dysphoria as the other. Only NB people, whose existence I doubt, would be fine as both genders - if they do exist, they are only a very small part of the population.

Philosophizing oneself in the context of "Do you even exist as you say do?" is a bit of a problem and puts a monumental task of proving my legitimacy, the so called trans debate is about rights and access to spaces.

[Proctopeo]

Blaire White isn't a garbage human being.

As I said in my post where I talked a bit about her, she's no saint, but her counterparts on the other side of the aisle prove that she could be far worse than she is and still be popular.

It's like calling your neighbor's house a dump when you live in a pile of rubble and garbage - sure, theirs might be rough around the edges, but you're not the one who should be making that call.

Also, in this thread, please remember to take this advice: be nice, be respectful.

Says the person being the least respectful of anyone here.

And on the Blaire White Thing: Apparently we're supposed to pretend that this didn't happen.

Stef really shouldn't have tried to defend one certain preteen drag queen. That's just opening yourself up to all kinds of accusations. Though the most accurate accusation would be "probably-unknowing enabler", not "pedophile".

As for Saciu, eh, she's being more respectful than certain regulars. She just has opinions you don't like, is all.

[Hediacrana]

As I said in my post where I talked a bit about her, she's no saint, but her counterparts on the other side of the aisle prove that she could be far worse than she is and still be popular.

"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"

As for Saciu, eh, she's being more respectful than certain regulars.

"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"

You sure like the tu quoque argument, don't you?

[Cekoviu]

It's funny that one group says "oh we're so scientific" but then has people saying that there are millions of genders.

Are you still peddling this fucking bullshit? Alright, let's show you how stupid this argument is with an example:

It's funny that physicists claim to be scientists but then say there aren't a finite number of points on the electromagnetic BINARY. Everybody knows there are two electromagnetic categories a ray can have: gamma or radio. Everything else is just pseudoscientific bullshit, and any light ray that physicists claim to be another wavelength is just a confused gamma ray.

[Proctopeo]

As I said in my post where I talked a bit about her, she's no saint, but her counterparts on the other side of the aisle prove that she could be far worse than she is and still be popular.

"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"

As for Saciu, eh, she's being more respectful than certain regulars.

"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"

You sure like the tu quoque argument, don't you?

You really like the "fallacy fallacy" argument, don't you?

It's funny that one group says "oh we're so scientific" but then has people saying that there are millions of genders.

Are you still peddling this fucking bullshit? Alright, let's show you how stupid this argument is with an example:

It's funny that physicists claim to be scientists but then say there aren't a finite number of points on the electromagnetic BINARY. Everybody knows there are two electromagnetic categories a ray can have: gamma or radio. Everything else is just pseudoscientific bullshit, and any light ray that physicists claim to be another wavelength is just a confused gamma ray.

Gender is like light, outside of a certain band, it's invisible to the naked eye and anything not very long will kill you with enough exposure.
My gender is 425 hertz, in the ultra-low frequency band of radio genders. I can penetrate the earth and act as an early warning sign for earthquakes uwu~

[Cekoviu]

"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"



"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"

You sure like the tu quoque argument, don't you?

You really like the "fallacy fallacy" argument, don't you?

Just pointing out a fallacy is not a fallacy fallacy. It's only a fallacy fallacy if it's applied improperly, especially to something that isn't a fallacy.

Are you still peddling this fucking bullshit? Alright, let's show you how stupid this argument is with an example:

It's funny that physicists claim to be scientists but then say there aren't a finite number of points on the electromagnetic BINARY. Everybody knows there are two electromagnetic categories a ray can have: gamma or radio. Everything else is just pseudoscientific bullshit, and any light ray that physicists claim to be another wavelength is just a confused gamma ray.

Gender is like light, outside of a certain band, it's invisible to the naked eye and anything not very long will kill you with enough exposure.
My gender is 425 hertz, in the ultra-low frequency band of radio genders. I can penetrate the earth and act as an early warning sign for earthquakes uwu~

You could make a career out of intentionally missing the point. You should consider applying to Fox News.

[Hediacrana]

"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"



"This one is bad"
"Your side is worse!"

You sure like the tu quoque argument, don't you?

You really like the "fallacy fallacy" argument, don't you?

And now you're taking tu quoque to a meta level. Are you intentionally only replying with thinly-veiled versions of "But you!"?

[Proctopeo]

You really like the "fallacy fallacy" argument, don't you?

Just pointing out a fallacy is not a fallacy fallacy. It's only a fallacy fallacy if it's applied improperly, especially to something that isn't a fallacy.

No, it's a fallacy fallacy if you point out a fallacy and try and act like it alone means the conclusion is wrong. Which seems to have been what Hedia was trying to pull.

Gender is like light, outside of a certain band, it's invisible to the naked eye and anything not very long will kill you with enough exposure.
My gender is 425 hertz, in the ultra-low frequency band of radio genders. I can penetrate the earth and act as an early warning sign for earthquakes uwu~

You could make a career out of intentionally missing the point. You should consider applying to Fox News.

angrily low hums in radio
Also, your comparison (and point) was really out there, so I felt the need to meme it up.

You really like the "fallacy fallacy" argument, don't you?

And now you're taking tu quoque to a meta level. Are you intentionally only replying with thinly-veiled versions of "But you!"?

You could try and show why I'm wrong instead of constantly going "bUt fAlLaCy".

[Cekoviu]

Just pointing out a fallacy is not a fallacy fallacy. It's only a fallacy fallacy if it's applied improperly, especially to something that isn't a fallacy.

No, it's a fallacy fallacy if you point out a fallacy and try and act like it alone means the conclusion is wrong. Which seems to have been what Hedia was trying to pull.

Well, a logical fallacy to that degree often does make the conclusion wrong, so...

You could make a career out of intentionally missing the point. You should consider applying to Fox News.

angrily low hums in radio
Also, your comparison (and point) was really out there, so I felt the need to meme it up.

Is it, though? Because it's pretty much a direct parallel of what Saciu's been saying (minus the misrepresentation of physicists' position on the matter), just applied to something that nobody here should have emotional attachment to for illustrative purposes.