#protectjamesyounger

[Liriena]

For crying out loud, people, the child is SEVEN. Not exactly the natural age for your child to be thinking what gender they are.

Another one for the "didn't read any of the court documents and scientific research repeatedly posted on this thread" pile.

[Gormwood]

What's funny about this?

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

Something something throw your back something something reach.

[Pretty Much God]

What's funny about this?

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

[Definitely God]

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

It's a sin to be cruel, and taking joy in the pain of others.

[Vassenor]

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

If a person is abused and forced to do a thing, is it a choice?

[Torrocca]

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

Her father doesn't have girl's clothes at home. Couple that with how much her father's openly flaunting her "choices" to act as a boy around him, plus his assertion as per your own article that he tells Luna that she's a boy, rather than let her decide for herself, and it's blatantly obvious that Luna's making as much of a choice to attend school as a boy as a prisoner chooses to be locked in a cell.

[Grenartia]

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

"choosing"

And yes, any reasonable person should be distressed that a kid is being forced to be something they're not by an objectively and obviously abusive parent.

inb4 "you just described the mother", the father is the only parent with a history of abuse under his belt, and merely letting your child transition is nowhere near "child abuse". Nor is it "forcing them to be something they're not".

[Japan and Pacific States]

I'm not meaning to gaslight anyone here or be constrewed as trolling or whatever, but I find it awfully funny it recently came out, James decided on his own to attend school as a boy when his mother wasn't present. But of course, this is the typical battle of mother verses father, in a system so heavily set in favour of the mother, as per standards of western society, where under normal circumstances the child is sent to live under the care of the mother, unless the mother is proven to be an absolutely god awful human being. Then child is sent to live with them while the father.

From my perspective, reading everything in this thread it's just my observation that a good number of people here making the claims that it's the father abusing the child are dismissing any and all possible evidence, the father's not the one in the wrong but it could be the mother. I hate to be that guy but nowadays it seems that with the third wave feminist revolution, women are becoming, and I know that someone is going to report me for saying this but again.

It's my honest to god opinion. That women aren't entirely able to be trusted in this day and age. We've seen evidence of this with the #MeToo movement and the hijacking of the movement by opportunists who simply wish to take down those who are higher up in the economic or corporate food chain, so I'm of the opinion, any and all claims to the father being the one committing any abuse absolutely must be taken with a grain of salt. And in reference to my previous bringing up of the hijacking of the #MeToo movement, it is just as likely it's the mother committing abuse by trying to force the child into being someone he isn't, and he's just caught in the middle, children as they are, are easily manipulated by either their mother or father.

A child may be so easily manipulated into thinking he's some sort of artificial being and will go along with it until they reach maturity when they begin to question what their identity is. So once more I will state, I'm of the opinion that claims the father is committing abuse absolutely, must, be taken with a grain of salt. And the mother should also be treated with much the same suspicion until a consensus is reached whether it be by law or otherwise, as to the true nature of what is going on in the matter of James Younger. I would think and hope this position could be embraced by all but I am aware that after I post this, there will be those who will question it or even decry my stance on treating the mother with the same suspicion that the father is being treated with.

I look forward to defending my point.

[The Rich Port]

I'm not meaning to gaslight anyone here or be constrewed as trolling or whatever, but I find it awfully funny it recently came out, James decided on his own to attend school as a boy when his mother wasn't present. But of course, this is the typical battle of mother verses father, in a system so heavily set in favour of the mother, as per standards of western society, where under normal circumstances the child is sent to live under the care of the mother, unless the mother is proven to be an absolutely god awful human being. Then child is sent to live with them while the father.

From my perspective, reading everything in this thread it's just my observation that a good number of people here making the claims that it's the father abusing the child are dismissing any and all possible evidence, the father's not the one in the wrong but it could be the mother. I hate to be that guy but nowadays it seems that with the third wave feminist revolution, women are becoming, and I know that someone is going to report me for saying this but again.

It's my honest to god opinion. That women aren't entirely able to be trusted in this day and age. We've seen evidence of this with the #MeToo movement and the hijacking of the movement by opportunists who simply wish to take down those who are higher up in the economic or corporate food chain, so I'm of the opinion, any and all claims to the father being the one committing any abuse absolutely must be taken with a grain of salt. And in reference to my previous bringing up of the hijacking of the #MeToo movement, it is just as likely it's the mother committing abuse by trying to force the child into being someone he isn't, and he's just caught in the middle, children as they are, are easily manipulated by either their mother or father.

A child may be so easily manipulated into thinking he's some sort of artificial being and will go along with it until they reach maturity when they begin to question what their identity is. So once more I will state, I'm of the opinion that claims the father is committing abuse absolutely, must, be taken with a grain of salt. And the mother should also be treated with much the same suspicion until a consensus is reached whether it be by law or otherwise, as to the true nature of what is going on in the matter of James Younger. I would think and hope this position could be embraced by all but I am aware that after I post this, there will be those who will question it or even decry my stance on treating the mother with the same suspicion that the father is being treated with.

I look forward to defending my point.

Source on the kid going to school when "the mother wasn't present"?

So... The father was present? Or were they both absent? Did the teachers just assume his gender?

The entire crux of the abuse case against the father is that he is forcing the kid to not be transgender when he's with the father.

Except that unlike the claim that the mother is the one abusing the kid by forcing him to be transgender, there's EVIDENCE the father is abusive in other ways beyond forcing gender in the form of video and audio.

[Vassenor]

I'm not meaning to gaslight anyone here or be constrewed as trolling or whatever, but I find it awfully funny it recently came out, James decided on his own to attend school as a boy when his mother wasn't present. But of course, this is the typical battle of mother verses father, in a system so heavily set in favour of the mother, as per standards of western society, where under normal circumstances the child is sent to live under the care of the mother, unless the mother is proven to be an absolutely god awful human being. Then child is sent to live with them while the father.

From my perspective, reading everything in this thread it's just my observation that a good number of people here making the claims that it's the father abusing the child are dismissing any and all possible evidence, the father's not the one in the wrong but it could be the mother. I hate to be that guy but nowadays it seems that with the third wave feminist revolution, women are becoming, and I know that someone is going to report me for saying this but again.

It's my honest to god opinion. That women aren't entirely able to be trusted in this day and age. We've seen evidence of this with the #MeToo movement and the hijacking of the movement by opportunists who simply wish to take down those who are higher up in the economic or corporate food chain, so I'm of the opinion, any and all claims to the father being the one committing any abuse absolutely must be taken with a grain of salt. And in reference to my previous bringing up of the hijacking of the #MeToo movement, it is just as likely it's the mother committing abuse by trying to force the child into being someone he isn't, and he's just caught in the middle, children as they are, are easily manipulated by either their mother or father.

A child may be so easily manipulated into thinking he's some sort of artificial being and will go along with it until they reach maturity when they begin to question what their identity is. So once more I will state, I'm of the opinion that claims the father is committing abuse absolutely, must, be taken with a grain of salt. And the mother should also be treated with much the same suspicion until a consensus is reached whether it be by law or otherwise, as to the true nature of what is going on in the matter of James Younger. I would think and hope this position could be embraced by all but I am aware that after I post this, there will be those who will question it or even decry my stance on treating the mother with the same suspicion that the father is being treated with.

I look forward to defending my point.

So what is the evidence that the mother is abusive?

[Japan and Pacific States]

I'm not meaning to gaslight anyone here or be constrewed as trolling or whatever, but I find it awfully funny it recently came out, James decided on his own to attend school as a boy when his mother wasn't present. But of course, this is the typical battle of mother verses father, in a system so heavily set in favour of the mother, as per standards of western society, where under normal circumstances the child is sent to live under the care of the mother, unless the mother is proven to be an absolutely god awful human being. Then child is sent to live with them while the father.

From my perspective, reading everything in this thread it's just my observation that a good number of people here making the claims that it's the father abusing the child are dismissing any and all possible evidence, the father's not the one in the wrong but it could be the mother. I hate to be that guy but nowadays it seems that with the third wave feminist revolution, women are becoming, and I know that someone is going to report me for saying this but again.

It's my honest to god opinion. That women aren't entirely able to be trusted in this day and age. We've seen evidence of this with the #MeToo movement and the hijacking of the movement by opportunists who simply wish to take down those who are higher up in the economic or corporate food chain, so I'm of the opinion, any and all claims to the father being the one committing any abuse absolutely must be taken with a grain of salt. And in reference to my previous bringing up of the hijacking of the #MeToo movement, it is just as likely it's the mother committing abuse by trying to force the child into being someone he isn't, and he's just caught in the middle, children as they are, are easily manipulated by either their mother or father.

A child may be so easily manipulated into thinking he's some sort of artificial being and will go along with it until they reach maturity when they begin to question what their identity is. So once more I will state, I'm of the opinion that claims the father is committing abuse absolutely, must, be taken with a grain of salt. And the mother should also be treated with much the same suspicion until a consensus is reached whether it be by law or otherwise, as to the true nature of what is going on in the matter of James Younger. I would think and hope this position could be embraced by all but I am aware that after I post this, there will be those who will question it or even decry my stance on treating the mother with the same suspicion that the father is being treated with.

I look forward to defending my point.

Source on the kid going to school when "the mother wasn't present"?

So... The father was present? Or were they both absent? Did the teachers just assume his gender?

The entire crux of the abuse case against the father is that he is forcing the kid to not be transgender when he's with the father.

Except that unlike the claim that the mother is the one abusing the kid by forcing him to be transgender, there's EVIDENCE the father is abusive in other ways beyond forcing gender in the form of video and audio.

Lifesitenews article on James Younger attending school as a boy

I regret that the BBC lacks an article so forgive me if the article I've linked is not up to your specifications, but it's about the closest thing to a neutral news source I could find.

While the article does state he was sent off to school by his father, I still believe that this should be considered, regardless. I see no evidence of this child being forced by his father to not be trans or any of that. However from my perspective with seeing all I've been able to find in the past, and I regret I do not have the time to dig up all the articles I had read previously on the matter. I must again reitterate, it doesn't seem in my opinion, that the father is committing any wrong doing.

And as to the questionnaire and answer photos that were posted on the first page of the thread, because I am aware this will be brought up. The issue on him not having any female orientated clothes in his home is his own choice, ultimately the father of his own choice does not have to supply such clothes if he so chooses. If it is truly desired then the mother may send clothes along with the child, however I will admit the father may not support any such choice on the part of the son for "transitioning" to another gender.

That is only natural, and he himself has stated, he believes the whole "transitioning" issue to be impressed upon the child by the mother, which he understandably wouldn't support for the simple fact that the child in question is just that, a child. While I hate to get into such areas of discussion, it would be best I feel to remind those perusing this thread and this discussion that in many western countries, there are laws set which are age related in regards to firearms ownership, consumption of alcohol, carnial relations, voting, and for operation of motor vehicles.

These laws are set in place because it is nominally accepted and believed that these laws and the ages related to them are when one grows to be mature enough to handle such things as firearms, carnial relations, alcohol, voting, and the operation of motor vehicles. So keeping that in mind. Does it seem a bit far fetched that someone would believe a child is best to wait until they reach the common legal age of 18 to make the decision to "transition" to another gender?

[The Rich Port]

Source on the kid going to school when "the mother wasn't present"?

So... The father was present? Or were they both absent? Did the teachers just assume his gender?

The entire crux of the abuse case against the father is that he is forcing the kid to not be transgender when he's with the father.

Except that unlike the claim that the mother is the one abusing the kid by forcing him to be transgender, there's EVIDENCE the father is abusive in other ways beyond forcing gender in the form of video and audio.

Lifesitenews article on James Younger attending school as a boy

I regret that the BBC lacks an article so forgive me if the article I've linked is not up to your specifications, but it's about the closest thing to a neutral news source I could find.

While the article does state he was sent off to school by his father, I still believe that this should be considered, regardless. I see no evidence of this child being forced by his father to not be trans or any of that. However from my perspective with seeing all I've been able to find in the past, and I regret I do not have the time to dig up all the articles I had read previously on the matter. I must again reitterate, it doesn't seem in my opinion, that the father is committing any wrong doing.

And as to the questionnaire and answer photos that were posted on the first page of the thread, because I am aware this will be brought up. The issue on him not having any female orientated clothes in his home is his own choice, ultimately the father of his own choice does not have to supply such clothes if he so chooses. If it is truly desired then the mother may send clothes along with the child, however I will admit the father may not support any such choice on the part of the son for "transitioning" to another gender.

That is only natural, and he himself has stated, he believes the whole "transitioning" issue to be impressed upon the child by the mother, which he understandably wouldn't support for the simple fact that the child in question is just that, a child. While I hate to get into such areas of discussion, it would be best I feel to remind those perusing this thread and this discussion that in many western countries, there are laws set which are age related in regards to firearms ownership, consumption of alcohol, carnial relations, voting, and for operation of motor vehicles.

These laws are set in place because it is nominally accepted and believed that these laws and the ages related to them are when one grows to be mature enough to handle such things as firearms, carnial relations, alcohol, voting, and the operation of motor vehicles. So keeping that in mind. Does it seem a bit far fetched that someone would believe a child is best to wait until they reach the common legal age of 18 to make the decision to "transition" to another gender?

... A conservative pro-life website is your idea of a neutral news source?



So much for being so concerned about gas-lighting people.

You think maybe they wouldn't have anti-trans biases?

[Japan and Pacific States]

Lifesitenews article on James Younger attending school as a boy

I regret that the BBC lacks an article so forgive me if the article I've linked is not up to your specifications, but it's about the closest thing to a neutral news source I could find.

While the article does state he was sent off to school by his father, I still believe that this should be considered, regardless. I see no evidence of this child being forced by his father to not be trans or any of that. However from my perspective with seeing all I've been able to find in the past, and I regret I do not have the time to dig up all the articles I had read previously on the matter. I must again reitterate, it doesn't seem in my opinion, that the father is committing any wrong doing.

And as to the questionnaire and answer photos that were posted on the first page of the thread, because I am aware this will be brought up. The issue on him not having any female orientated clothes in his home is his own choice, ultimately the father of his own choice does not have to supply such clothes if he so chooses. If it is truly desired then the mother may send clothes along with the child, however I will admit the father may not support any such choice on the part of the son for "transitioning" to another gender.

That is only natural, and he himself has stated, he believes the whole "transitioning" issue to be impressed upon the child by the mother, which he understandably wouldn't support for the simple fact that the child in question is just that, a child. While I hate to get into such areas of discussion, it would be best I feel to remind those perusing this thread and this discussion that in many western countries, there are laws set which are age related in regards to firearms ownership, consumption of alcohol, carnial relations, voting, and for operation of motor vehicles.

These laws are set in place because it is nominally accepted and believed that these laws and the ages related to them are when one grows to be mature enough to handle such things as firearms, carnial relations, alcohol, voting, and the operation of motor vehicles. So keeping that in mind. Does it seem a bit far fetched that someone would believe a child is best to wait until they reach the common legal age of 18 to make the decision to "transition" to another gender?

... A conservative pro-life website is your idea of a neutral news source?

:roll:

So much for being so concerned about gas-lighting people.

You think maybe they wouldn't have anti-trans biases?

I will admit I am not aware of their own biases whether or not they exist, as I felt it was a better source, than something like the new york post, which is but a tabloid website and news source in general.

If the BBC had an article on it, I certainly would've provided that instead. And while yes I will admit, those with a conservative view on life whilst also being "pro-life" shouldn't discount the facts as they are. The beauty of the human race is we all have differing opinions, such conversations as this would be droll if we all had the same opinion, which as I can see, by a certain number of people would be accurately summed up in saying, that those who are in favour of the mother, beliving her incapable of any wrongdoing whilst also believing her incapable of possibly forcing this child to be trans, would be in favour of removing the father's parental rights as a whole, whilst allowing potential wrong doing to be done unto the child by the mother.

Also I would appreciate it, if you took the time to read all my points, then everything would be clearly understood, and assumptions not made as to my points being made.

I only bring this up because it seems you checked the link then proceeded to post without reading everything I had written to understand my point.

[The New California Republic]

Lifesitenews article on James Younger attending school as a boy

I regret that the BBC lacks an article so forgive me if the article I've linked is not up to your specifications, but it's about the closest thing to a neutral news source I could find.

That site is not "neutral" by any stretch of the imagination, not even close.

[Japan and Pacific States]

Lifesitenews article on James Younger attending school as a boy

I regret that the BBC lacks an article so forgive me if the article I've linked is not up to your specifications, but it's about the closest thing to a neutral news source I could find.

That site is not "neutral" by any stretch of the imagination, not even close.

I already addressed that point in the post above you.

[The New California Republic]

That site is not "neutral" by any stretch of the imagination, not even close.

I already addressed that point in the post above you.

In the future don't try to sell that shit as the "closest thing to a neutral news source I could find", as that's just pure sophistry.

[Japan and Pacific States]

I already addressed that point in the post above you.

In the future don't try to sell that shit as the "closest thing to a neutral news source I could find", as that's just pure sophistry.

Yes, don't try to sell the closest thing to neutral news to my knowledge as being such when the other option I found was the washington post, a as previously stated, tabloid news source, of course.

[The New California Republic]

In the future don't try to sell that shit as the "closest thing to a neutral news source I could find", as that's just pure sophistry.

Yes, don't try to sell the closest thing to neutral news to my knowledge as being such when the other option I found was the washington post, a as previously stated, tabloid news source, of course.

Come on for fuck's sake, what was even the point in saying anything about it being the "closest thing to a neutral news source I could find" if you knew fine well that it wasn't in any way neutral?

[Japan and Pacific States]

Yes, don't try to sell the closest thing to neutral news to my knowledge as being such when the other option I found was the washington post, a as previously stated, tabloid news source, of course.

Come on for fuck's sake, what was even the point in saying anything about it being the "closest thing to a neutral news source I could find" if you knew fine well that it wasn't in any way neutral? :eyebrow:

Because it's not a news source comparable in nature at times, to being a more realistic version of "The Onion". And with that. This shall be my last post since we're getting off topic. Do DM me when we return to the topic.

[The New California Republic]

Come on for fuck's sake, what was even the point in saying anything about it being the "closest thing to a neutral news source I could find" if you knew fine well that it wasn't in any way neutral?

Because it's not a news source comparable in nature at times, to being a more realistic version of "The Onion". And with that. This shall be my last post since we're getting off topic. Do DM me when we return to the topic.

Critiquing your sources related to the subject matter is hardly "off topic".

[True Refuge]

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

Come on, man. At least try to pretend you're posting in good faith.

[Gravlen]

I'm not meaning to gaslight anyone here or be constrewed as trolling or whatever, but I find it awfully funny it recently came out, James decided on his own to attend school as a boy when his mother wasn't present.

As the father has testified, he does not have any girls' clothes at home, nor does he allow the child to dress as a girl. The child has also stated that they are afraid of the father. So when you say that the child "decided", what were the options?

But of course, this is the typical battle of mother verses father, in a system so heavily set in favour of the mother, as per standards of western society, where under normal circumstances the child is sent to live under the care of the mother, unless the mother is proven to be an absolutely god awful human being. Then child is sent to live with them while the father.

What?

From my perspective, reading everything in this thread it's just my observation that a good number of people here making the claims that it's the father abusing the child are dismissing any and all possible evidence, the father's not the one in the wrong but it could be the mother.

On the contrary, looking at the available evidence - court transcripts and verdicts included - it's clear that the father is an abusive asshole. Claiming that the father is not in the wrong is ignoring the evidence.

I hate to be that guy but nowadays it seems that with the third wave feminist revolution, women are becoming, and I know that someone is going to report me for saying this but again.

It's my honest to god opinion. That women aren't entirely able to be trusted in this day and age. We've seen evidence of this with the #MeToo movement and the hijacking of the movement by opportunists who simply wish to take down those who are higher up in the economic or corporate food chain, so I'm of the opinion, any and all claims to the father being the one committing any abuse absolutely must be taken with a grain of salt. And in reference to my previous bringing up of the hijacking of the #MeToo movement, it is just as likely it's the mother committing abuse by trying to force the child into being someone he isn't, and he's just caught in the middle, children as they are, are easily manipulated by either their mother or father.

case in point, as you are ignoring the evidence given by Child Protective Services and medical personel, and instead jump to a conclusion not based on available evidence.

A child may be so easily manipulated into thinking he's some sort of artificial being and will go along with it until they reach maturity when they begin to question what their identity is. So once more I will state, I'm of the opinion that claims the father is committing abuse absolutely, must, be taken with a grain of salt. And the mother should also be treated with much the same suspicion until a consensus is reached whether it be by law or otherwise, as to the true nature of what is going on in the matter of James Younger.

You're a day late and a dollar short, bucko.

I would think and hope this position could be embraced by all but I am aware that after I post this, there will be those who will question it or even decry my stance on treating the mother with the same suspicion that the father is being treated with.

I look forward to defending my point.

I look forward to you reading the court documents.

[Gormwood]

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

Come on, man. At least try to pretend you're posting in good faith.

Good faith, from someone who just puppet wanked?

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

It's a sin to be cruel, and taking joy in the pain of others.

[Pretty Much God]

Come on, man. At least try to pretend you're posting in good faith.

Good faith, from someone who just puppet wanked?

It's a sin to be cruel, and taking joy in the pain of others.

Nope, not me.
I'm already pretty much god, I don't need to be definitely god.

[Liriena]

Transphobes sure love telling on themselves. They can only concern troll so much before they slip up and show their underlying gleeful cruelty.

You're oddly distressed about James Younger choosing to attend school as a boy

going for the "u mad" tactic? in 2019?

transphobes can't even meme war