Dos the Left Hate Pride? [Archive]

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 10:50 AM

maerilith

07-05-2016, 11:14 AM

Oh there are definitely turds throughout the political spectrum and anyone who attempts to foist their beliefs onto another is wrong. That is the problem I see with federal legislation on social issues though. Invariably a minority is oppressed. People seem to think it is great when it is a minority with whom they do not identify, but naturally cry foul when its closer to home.

I don't see how this is a Jesus vs. Gays issue though. I was just responding to Blitz's unreasonable comment on trannies. There are very few people who are actually proud to be LGBT, because it just isn't necessarily something to be proud of. It's like being proud of being white or brown or tall or short. That is of course not to say it is something to be ashamed of either. One can be and generally is indifferent to most things of his/her nature. My point about pride parades is that they seem to be more of an expression of liberation stemming from a mindset of victimization, which equally applies to the religious right and every other special interest group whining for special treatment.

This idea sprang from the observation that the left is perfectly willing and in fact eager to attack minorities who refuse to identify as victims, but it may just be that it is the case for any minority they disagree with /shrug.

Is pride bad?

When its extreme and all consuming and not in moderation yeah absolutely! I agree with you. It sucks when social issues become the perview of the overlords :( And one of the reasons I berg out so much, I hate seeing the LGBT shit in politics. Both ways. It's terrible. I want an emotional release from the powerless I feel when the power is in a politicians hands.

Why can't families focus on dealing with this stuff and being families?

I know mine is pretty cool about it.

Feeling momentary pride, being proud of ones accomplishments and ones dreams (be it graceful equity for all) or something else isn't that bad.

But when it becomes about superiority to another or a justification for ones superiority. It becomes dark. All things have the potential for good and bad.

I'm certainly guilty of being dark and prideful :(

But I try to move beyond it with each moment I get so that I can worry about something else, or not worry at all.

****

Hmm let's wax philosophically.... about the metaphysical duality of our natures...?

One doesn't have pride without shame. One doesn't have hate without love, anger without fear, envy without admiration.

I don't know if it's wired into our genetic double helix to be so dual natured and binary. We could relax and be a bit more analog. Certainly not everyone suffers the imbalance of these emotions.

I think when we are hurt, one way or the other, it can cause a long term condition, and until we acknowledge and face for example our shame, we use pride to bandaid over it and that's when the pride becomes the most negative force rather than being in balance with the shame because we aren't able to face and acknowledge one or the other.

These issues can even apply at all levels to silly things, like instant cast wands in pvp.

I think facing this stuff is one of the biggest things we do for ourselves while we are alive to experience it.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 12:28 PM

It is well established that the left has no genuine interest in liberty, detests responsibility and is averse to critical thought not unlike most of humanity in general. However beyond the left's favored state of failure and associated dependence, it occurred to me this morning that in the true spirit of self-loathing, the left most abhors pride.

What do you think?

Look an incorrectly constructed argument based on non-factual assumption. Par for the course.

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 12:35 PM

Look an incorrectly constructed argument based on non-factual assumption. Par for the course.

Just generalizations based on observation. You are an aberration with regard to the critical thought part, but you have to admit that you are surrounded by as many retards as you are fighting against. That is all just background though. The topic is pride. Do you think the left hates pride?

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 12:41 PM

I think when we are hurt, one way or the other, it can cause a long term condition, and until we acknowledge and face for example our shame, we use pride to bandaid over it and that's when the pride becomes the most negative force rather than being in balance with the shame because we aren't able to face and acknowledge one or the other.

I'll have to think on this because it really speaks to my observation. I view the behavior as shame driven like you are suggesting. Not saying pride is inherently virtuous, just that pride is confident, not insecure. Good post ^^

maerilith

07-05-2016, 01:24 PM

I'll have to think on this because it really speaks to my observation. I view the behavior as shame driven like you are suggesting. Not saying pride is inherently virtuous, just that pride is confident, not insecure. Good post ^^

Good points.

In response to your original point? Does the left hate pride?

I think it's a bit general and stereotypical. I can't really speak for the left. Because I myself don't exactly identify as the left. I don't hate pride. I think it's OK. Sometimes. Just like anything, pride can be used to make a point. Or to illustrate the struggle of a marginalized group. Or to share an idea (like that we should all love each other and things will suck a little less, a bit, sort of, maybe, kind of).

However I think a lot of people on the left probably do. Some obviously don't. I bet there's someone on the left that just hates that fact that they have to support anything pride related. But does it anyway. Because it's politically expedient.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 01:38 PM

Just generalizations based on observation. You are an aberration with regard to the critical thought part, but you have to admit that you are surrounded by as many retards as you are fighting against. That is all just background though. The topic is pride. Do you think the left hates pride?

Does the left hate pride is equivalent to asking does the right hate diversity.

Both "sides" have their vocal idiots.

No the left doesn't hate pride... they may hate arrogance though.

Your framework is idiotic though. Every point you try to make is pretty ignorant and the real question is about your ability to observe without bias. It seems your observation is flawed, maybe work on that? It's the issue at hand.

It is well established that the left has no genuine interest in liberty, detests responsibility and is averse to critical thought not unlike most of humanity in general. However beyond the left's favored state of failure and associated dependence, it occurred to me this morning that in the true spirit of self-loathing, the left most abhors pride.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 01:42 PM

I'm pretty sure the left is not exactly hateful of sexism, but way more aware of it. And way more apt to communicate without it. Making it appealing to certain demographics.

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 01:46 PM

it's literally a cardinal sin

maerilith

07-05-2016, 01:52 PM

it's literally a cardinal sin

The negative version of pride (Latin, superbia) is considered, on almost every list, the original and most serious of the seven deadly sins: the source of the others- thus it is able to father directly and/or indirectly all sin. Also known as hubris (from ancient Greek ὕβρις),or futility, it is identified as dangerously corrupt selfishness, the putting of one's own desires, urges, wants, and whims before the welfare of people.

In even more destructive cases, it is possessing the irrational belief that one is automatically and essentially better or more important than others, failing to acknowledge the accomplishments of others, and excessive admiration of the personal image or self (especially forgetting one's own lack of divinity, and refusing to acknowledge one's own limits, faults, or wrongs as a human being).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_deadly_sins#Pride

pretty sure thats the definition I've always used to define pride in a sense when it's negative. though a lot of people have made two versions of pride

needless to say, putting the needs of ones self above others is pretty bad when your dictating what others must absolutely do in order to protect yourself............................. taking my life, or me taking someone else's life, because their or mine is better for example... its the root of all sin. And creates negative pain in the stream of consciousness, that oscillates back and forth. No side will ever win in eternity, and only peace and harmony will be reached if a steady even vibration or balance is attained. Sadly a flatline produces no feedback in a holographic system so life does not exist without fluctuation. The purpose of life is to achieve a vibrational state.

there's plenty people in the world who support me (for example), and plenty more, without dictation.

the problem is the right is knee-jerk responding to stuff like that and viola you have the conservative hate mongering machine

I never once in my life overtly lobbied for or fought for my own rights or political agenda. In fact when I did fight for selfish reasons I failed and had very bad ... karma? until I became aware that it was more important to fight for everyones right to be free and that's when my own personal healing process and realization of shame came in. I mean, I went through a lot of shit around 9/11 and such, would have been happy to have joined the end of times in warfare. But when I turned that around and started caring about the people I served with that changed the ballgame. I'm probably making some erroneous logical statement here. But the point is... when I loved my friends in arms, I began to love myself and want to see better for us all. So that "We" didn't have to keep suffering eternally.

I don't consider myself prideful. Or "superior". Just freerer and more wise to give words of wisdom and teach and to move towards a better world where people aren't ruled by their pride, whatever label it may take.

For a long time the LGBT pride thing was detrimental to me (if we're going to talk about pride in that sense).

Hell even being overly prideful about ones own definition of pride itself to the point of hurting other people because we may wan't them to have the same definitions. Well that's sinful. And a path to darkness. Pain and suffering.

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 02:07 PM

my point: this whole conversation is asinine; criticizing the left for hating pride implies the right is hypocritical and impious.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 02:09 PM

my point: this whole conversation is asinine; criticizing the left for hating pride implies the right is hypocritical and impious.

I can agree with that sentiment.

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 02:51 PM

I think, seeing like 1 or 2 LGBT flags only during the LGBT appreciation month only in the clubs that serve LGBT people vs the 200,000 rebel flags and Jesus Saves signs (everywhere all over) is indicative of the pride issues people have with themselves and their faiths.

My idea for a billboard.. imagine this...

Does it matter if its a boy or a girl? Picture of a cute baby. Nothing more said.

Could be for anti-abortion causes am-i-right?

I might also be a bit bootyhurt because you know, there are actual problems in the south that need to be addressed, rather than shoving king james bible verses into discriminatory laws that support one biblical religion over all others. U know.

Your more likely to be killed by a CisMuslim, quit worrying about peaceful Christians. Jeebuz

maerilith

07-05-2016, 02:55 PM

Your more likely to be killed by a CisMuslim, quit worrying about peaceful Christians. Jeebuz

I may end up working for a Christian institution. IDK yet. I've considered it. Not ruling it out just because it's a private corp and Christian.

I think, back to the point about pride here. A lot of people confuse pride and love.

Its fine to show love and to demonstrate it, thats when your being kind and good about it.

If you think I hate that.. well. I'm sorry I wan't you to feel loved. Not hated. For real.

I just want love to. I think what happened last month was pretty bad. And I feel bad about it. And this politics trolling has really been damaging. I'm sure all around. It's uncool :(

I'm not proud of that. Or being a troll anymore. I've changed.

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 03:04 PM

Does the left hate pride is equivalent to asking does the right hate diversity.

Both "sides" have their vocal idiots.

No the left doesn't hate pride... they may hate arrogance though.

Your framework is idiotic though. Every point you try to make is pretty ignorant and the real question is about your ability to observe without bias. It seems your observation is flawed, maybe work on that? It's the issue at hand.

It is well established that the left has no genuine interest in liberty, detests responsibility and is averse to critical thought not unlike most of humanity in general. However beyond the left's favored state of failure and associated dependence, it occurred to me this morning that in the true spirit of self-loathing, the left most abhors pride.

Hmm.. The Left hates arrogance, lol

Might I introduce you to "your president" Barry Saetoro

Or the Giant Canker Sore Hillary Clinton

Yes yes the Left Hates arrogance...

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 03:12 PM

my point: this whole conversation is asinine; criticizing the left for hating pride implies the right is hypocritical and impious.

Why? It would seem you have assumed too much ^^

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 03:33 PM

Why? It would seem you have assumed too much ^^

Assuming that I have assumed to to much is, in fact, assuming too much.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 03:34 PM

Hmm.. The Left hates arrogance, lol

Might I introduce you to "your president" Barry Saetoro

Or the Giant Canker Sore Hillary Clinton

Yes yes the Left Hates arrogance...

I wouldn't say Hillary or Obama are on the left though. I'm not even defending whether or not these two are arrogant. Claiming they are leftists is inherently false though on a global values scale. Obama is a neo-lib and Hillary is a neo-con.

Educate yourself beyond whatever infowars tells you kiddo.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 03:35 PM

It is well established that the left has no genuine interest in liberty, detests responsibility and is averse to critical thought not unlike most of humanity in general. However beyond the left's favored state of failure and associated dependence, it occurred to me this morning that in the true spirit of self-loathing, the left most abhors pride.

Why? It would seem you have assumed too much ^^

I agree ^^ You assumed too much.(all)

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 03:38 PM

I wouldn't say Hillary or Obama are on the left though. I'm not even defending whether or not these two are arrogant. Claiming they are leftists is inherently false though on a global values scale. Obama is a neo-lib and Hillary is a neo-con.

Educate yourself beyond whatever infowars tells you kiddo.

Youre correct, I should of just told your dumbass to look in the mirror and you'll find the most arrogant PoS on the planet. Touché, retard.

Btw kiddo, they teach you that arrogance in the Military or were you just born a prick?

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 03:45 PM

Assuming that I have assumed to to much is, in fact, assuming too much.

It may very well be and yes, I want out on a limb there, but was and still am struggling to connect the dots. How does a discussion that I started imply the right is hypocritical and impious? Let's do away with the assumptions together! ^^

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 03:47 PM

I agree ^^ You assumed too much.(all)

Did you just make me debate myself AND copy my emoji?

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 03:50 PM

Youre correct, I should of just told your dumbass to look in the mirror and you'll find the most arrogant PoS on the planet. Touché, retard.

Btw kiddo, they teach you that arrogance in the Military or were you just born a prick?

Arrogance is about believing you are better, or smarter than other people. I don't believe that... but I do Know I am smarter than you. It's not arrogance if it's true, it's just the acceptance of fact based on your ability(or lack there of) to make intelligent points.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 03:50 PM

Did you just make me debate myself AND copy my emoji?

yes ;)

Secrets

07-05-2016, 03:51 PM

http://i.imgur.com/rDMr7by.jpg

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 03:53 PM

Arrogance is about believing you are better, or smarter than other people. I don't believe that... but I do Know I am smarter than you. It's not arrogance if it's true, it's just the acceptance of fact based on your ability(or lack there of) to make intelligent points.

This is why your DD214 says Dishonorable, son.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 03:54 PM

This is why your DD214 says Dishonorable, son.

^^Proving my point. Thanks

I don't think pride or arrogance is something that dishonorably discharge you for :) Mine's honorable though.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 04:03 PM

The way I see it, is as parent's know what will hurt their children. They could beat that child and burn their hands and fill them with fear because they don't want them to experience harm, but that's not love. That's not caring or nurturing someone or teaching them or helping them to be safe. Deep down there's some kind of neglect. Or fear that's not reasoned with or carefully considered when that happens.

I don't know how to explain that. But that's how I feel about really extremist hard line conservative people who are hateful and haven't got love, don't feel loved. They are like those children who were abused by parents who just weren't at the right spiritual place to care for them properly. Always angry, always trying to show people how hot and dangerous and bad fire is by burning everyone at the stake. :(

That doesn't make the child worthless, or the parents worthless. It just means we need to consider how they feel and how to treat them with respect so they don't turn even more rabid.

It'd be nice if rabid wolves didn't exist or suffer, perhaps I should look into the metaphysics of rabid wolves? But sometimes it's better to just stay away from the forest and let nature take it's course rather than trying to rule over and dominate all of humankind. It would be hubris to think that I could fix or solve these problems on my own without the love and understanding of my fellow Americans. Or that it's in my power or my right to decide what's morally acceptable for you. But I can offer some respect in return so that you may follow your path.

I hope those still searching find their integrity and honor one day. I know that I did. And that it has helped me to become a true American hero. Honorably discharged and respected by my fellow Americans. Loved and cared for ready to serve if the call ever goes out.

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 04:06 PM

^^Proving my point. Thanks

I don't think pride or arrogance is something that dishonorably discharge you for :) Mine's honorable though.

Some die to Charlie, others just die, we don't all deserve to go home.

1 night in the bush and you'd be the latter for sure.

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 04:08 PM

yes ;)

Well, then... The emoji is free, but I am not sure you would care to see me debate myself further ^^

We can disregard the background going forward, I SUPPOSE... I thought it was pretty relevant, but may be slightly bias.

Interesting distinction you drew between pride and arrogance though. I think perception can make quite a challenge of differentiating the two.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 04:08 PM

Some die to Charlie, others just die, we don't all deserve to go home.

1 night in the bush and you'd be the latter for sure.

Feeling inferior are you? It's okay, lash out. I wouldn't expect someone like you to be intelligently productive with negative emotions.

:D

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 04:10 PM

http://i.imgur.com/rDMr7by.jpg

What is the term for a group of Sha?

maerilith

07-05-2016, 04:13 PM

I would be there to help you get home if I could. Even if you were being mad while in a foxhole. I'd try. I'd care.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 04:17 PM

Well, then... The emoji is free, but I am not sure you would care to see me debate myself further ^^

We can disregard the background going forward, I SUPPOSE... I thought it was pretty relevant, but may be slightly bias.

Interesting distinction you drew between pride and arrogance though. I think perception can make quite a challenge of differentiating the two.

Perception clouds a lot of things, perception isn't truth though. Oftentimes, an unintelligent person thinks an intelligent person is arrogant just because he uses more than four letter words, or refuses to give unintelligent thoughts the "credit they deserve" they don't deserve credit. Giving credit where it isn't deserved is just pandering to someones emotional ego or self-worth which would be the same thing that causes people like Blitzers to strike out at others. Low self-esteem doesn't make someones assertions about pride(excessive) or arrogance true.

Pride is a valuable thing as long as you don't misdirect it, which is something we all do. Pride is best (imo) when it's a recognition of accomplishment, or work well done etc.

National pride has little to no value to me. What are you proud of? being born in a geographic location? Buying an American flag isn't something to be proud of. Taking the time to properly consider political candidates, evaluate their positions and then voting them in an effort to improve a nation and thereby improving your life, your community etc? Sure.

quido

07-05-2016, 04:17 PM

I think this is a troll post.

Crypodosktorr

07-05-2016, 04:19 PM

Sometimes I fart and a tiny bit of wetness coats my anus. I routinely have to wipe throughout my day. Otherwise I get butt crust, which can stink real bad. Reminds me of this post.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 04:24 PM

Sometimes I fart and a tiny bit of wetness coats my anus. I routinely have to wipe throughout my day. Otherwise I get butt crust, which can stink real bad. Reminds me of this post.

Sometimes I pee a little whenever I stand up. Even if it's to salute the American flag.

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 04:26 PM

Feeling inferior are you? It's okay, lash out. I wouldn't expect someone like you to be intelligently productive with negative emotions.

:D

Yes, feeling inferior over the interwebs, someone call the suicide hotline.

I doubt you ever served, every post you make is unbecoming.

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 04:28 PM

Yes, feeling inferior over the interwebs, someone call the suicide hotline.

I doubt you ever served, every post you make is unbecoming.

Please find in the UCMJ, where a vet isn't allowed to express his opinion in a logical fashion on an internet forum. Please.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 04:33 PM

/pras Alarti, this kid is full of pride that they served or are cool for doing so (or I don't know I can't really tell for sure, they seem to not want to acknowledge anyone else). They maybe perhaps didn't feel the calling and understand that the pride should have been in the people they served with and for.

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 04:40 PM

I think this is a troll post.

Which? Mine? Or Alarti's above yours? I assure you, my OP was a legitimate thought that passed through my mind this morning and I just let it dribble out my fingers onto the internet where it belonged.

What do you think about pride? Do you think the left hates it?

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 04:42 PM

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 04:59 PM

Your explicit assertion: liberals hate pride
Your tacit assertion: pride is a good thing and people who hate pride are bad, therefore liberals are bad
My assertion: it is literally a basic tenet of christianity that pride is the worst possible sin

Now. I generally prefer to let people draw their own conclusions from facts rather than spell them out, but here's a few obvious ones if you got lost somewhere along the way:

Most people in the US (regardless of political affiliation) are christian, and if they follow those tenets they should call patent bullshit on the aforementioned assumption that pride is a good thing

An even higher percentage of the political right are christian than the US population at large, and should be even more inclined than said population at large to espouse the concept of pride being sinful and wrong

If they aren't/don't, they are being hypocritical, which I'm assuming everyone agrees is bad...

I think it is obvious that you could then draw the following conclusion (irrespective of your actual religious affiliation, which I do not care to know):

anyone who criticizes a specific group of a specific like or dislike of a behavior without acknolwedging and understanding that a much larger group also has that exact same behavior codified in their belief system is simply ignoring reality, or, they are also tacitly accusing that group of hypocrisy.

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 05:08 PM

JurisDictum

07-05-2016, 05:13 PM

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 05:17 PM

Wait, Liberals aren't bad?
Christians = bad
Whites = bad
Males = bad
Pride = Gay?

I made literally none of those assertions, ever, and in fact did not even bring up 3 of those topics

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 05:17 PM

Blitzers

07-05-2016, 05:18 PM

I made literally none of those assertions, ever, and in fact did not even bring up 3 of those 4 topics

I didn't read your post, I was just fucking around man

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 05:19 PM

I didn't read your post

i can tell

Crypodosktorr

07-05-2016, 05:23 PM

Penis in my butt. U like pizza gut , anchovies all over my salted pickle makes me tickle, lick my ass , pass gas mow my grass. Ding lvl 54 you a little horr.I win ay Everquest let me see them breasts

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 05:34 PM

I think liberals are much more pro pride than conservatives. Some of this is just a branding reality. Liberals can't say: "be proud to be gay, be proud if you are female, be proud if you are white!." White pride is unfortunately related a lot of ugly ethnic nationalist trends in our country.

In short, we encourage people to be proud to be black or whatever, because its much more likely someone would be ashamed of being black or gay or whatever. We don't need to remind people to be proud of being a white American -- because there really isn't any unjustified shame belonging to that group overall.

This is really a good point about liberal promotion of pride and prohibition on its expression. As I suggested earlier, it seems to me that those things aren't really worth being proud of because you didn't do anything to secure them. You are just born that way. Pride in circumstance just seems odd and I think many people feel the same even though they may not recognize it. I think that is why despite explicit displays of pride, many on the left do not appear to have pride. And that I believe is the source of my observation. There is a certain level of discontent or shame for one reason or another, so when they do not receive the recognition they feel they are due, or they encounter genuine pride in others they take it as arrogance or slight against them or some other nastiness.

maskedmelon

07-05-2016, 05:35 PM

Penis in my butt. U like pizza gut , anchovies all over my salted pickle makes me tickle, lick my ass , pass gas mow my grass. Ding lvl 54 you a little horr.I win ay Everquest let me see them breasts

That you Chabs?

Daywolf

07-05-2016, 07:41 PM

My assertion: it is literally a basic tenet of christianity that pride is the worst possible sinI'm guessing you were raised Catholic? This and as you said most in the US are Christians, which I don't believe is true. Sure, many say they are, but many or most of those are involved in the Emergent one-world religion such as the pope hat is pushing. Like my nephews GF, she says she's a Christian, but really she's a trendy western buddhist. People try to mix and match a lot of different things, but that just makes something else.

But as far as "pride" goes, it's a catalyst, not a sin in itself. It's a wrapper for many things, and can be used in different ways. So, pride is usually associated with something, such as most any word that contains "self-" (excluding the word "-humility") can lead to a bad thing. You see where I'm going with that. So like, can you be proud of your Son without such pride being "sin"? Of course! I mean 'to be well pleased' is a form of pride, and if invested into someone else for the right reasons and proper measure, there is no dishonor.

As for the topic, imo ~90% of Democrats are full of self-pride, and become enraged if anyone else offends their pride by disagreeing with them or resisting their force to make you comply to their self-righteous self-appointed moral high-ground rules and laws they often create on the fly. So prepare to be tagged as a "-phobe" of some sort, as they make up a bunch of shite to smear you into some lowly shame box beneath them. Same goes for some Repubs, mainly those that seem to have much in common with the Dems and the left.

Archalen

07-05-2016, 08:27 PM

First of all, depends what you're proud of.

Second of all, depends what behaviors the pride itself leads to.

Pride can have negative and positive outcomes.

pickled_heretic

07-05-2016, 09:03 PM

I'm guessing you were raised Catholic? This and as you said most in the US are Christians, which I don't believe is true. Sure, many say they are, but many or most of those are involved in the Emergent one-world religion such as the pope hat is pushing. Like my nephews GF, she says she's a Christian, but really she's a trendy western buddhist. People try to mix and match a lot of different things, but that just makes something else.

But as far as "pride" goes, it's a catalyst, not a sin in itself. It's a wrapper for many things, and can be used in different ways. So, pride is usually associated with something, such as most any word that contains "self-" (excluding the word "-humility") can lead to a bad thing. You see where I'm going with that. So like, can you be proud of your Son without such pride being "sin"? Of course! I mean 'to be well pleased' is a form of pride, and if invested into someone else for the right reasons and proper measure, there is no dishonor.

As for the topic, imo ~90% of Democrats are full of self-pride, and become enraged if anyone else offends their pride by disagreeing with them or resisting their force to make you comply to their self-righteous self-appointed moral high-ground rules and laws they often create on the fly. So prepare to be tagged as a "-phobe" of some sort, as they make up a bunch of shite to smear you into some lowly shame box beneath them. Same goes for some Repubs, mainly those that seem to have much in common with the Dems and the left.

What people call themselves is the only valid definition for what religion people are. Anything else falls apart to scrutiny. example: If we use your version for who is and is not a Christian (which is that other people can tell them what religion they are), I'm fairly sure many other Christians (perhaps even a plurality in the US, given demographics) would affirm that you are something other than a Christian because you are stating that pride is not a sin when it has been considered a sin since before the Catholic church even existed. If you grant yourself the ability to judge whether or not a certain person is of a given faith, you open yourself up to the same scrutiny.

big_ole_jpn

07-05-2016, 09:10 PM

What people call themselves is the only valid definition for what religion people are. Anything else falls apart to scrutiny. example: If we use your version for who is and is not a Christian (which is that other people can tell them what religion they are), I'm fairly sure many other Christians (perhaps even a plurality in the US, given demographics) would affirm that you are something other than a Christian because you are stating that pride is not a sin when it has been considered a sin since before the Catholic church even existed. If you grant yourself the ability to judge whether or not a certain person is of a given faith, you open yourself up to the same scrutiny.

nice post count 888, i suggest you never post again to maintain it

Alarti0001

07-05-2016, 09:26 PM

As for the topic, imo ~90% of Democrats are full of self-pride, and become enraged if anyone else offends their pride by disagreeing with them or resisting their force to make you comply to their self-righteous self-appointed moral high-ground rules and laws they often create on the fly.

So you're a democrat

Crypodosktorr

07-05-2016, 09:46 PM

God Alarti is so metropolitan demo it's disgusting

Aesop

07-05-2016, 09:49 PM

pride, my favorite sin.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 09:57 PM

Alarti bringing the rain with the short and to the point posts even a simpleton can understand <3

Daywolf

07-05-2016, 10:34 PM

So you're a democrat
Well if I were I'd be about the only one that favors state rights over BIG federal gov control. How else could a sociopathic democrat force their prideful will upon everyone w/o the help of BIG FEDERAL GOVERNMENT of which even puts itself ABOVE THE LAW (e.g. Hillary Clinton the Corrupt).

You see (I know you don't) some people pref not to have our lives dictated on how we ought to live, as long as a thing doesn't intentionally harm others. Limited government (mostly local gov) with lots of liberty, you decide for yourself.

The other side (more like you) believes everyone else is below them, especially the majority, and requires a dictating BIG ass government to bend the ear of and get them to crack down on every little thing you disagree with, across the board. The cost of liberty on the sacrificial alter for some fleeting idea of safety by ultimately a big globalist world government. You will find those chains heavy.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 10:45 PM

https://youtu.be/W6DtyhzABF0?t=3m20s

big_ole_jpn

07-05-2016, 10:51 PM

glad this email circus is finally over. now we can focus on real issues again.

Which candidate do you think is the most racist? The most misogynist?

Crypodosktorr

07-05-2016, 10:51 PM

Please ban Merilith, it is so disgusting. Kill it with fire.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 10:59 PM

Please ban Merilith, it is so disgusting. Kill it with fire.

At least spell my pseudonym right if your going to give me attention. ;)

big_ole_jpn

07-05-2016, 11:01 PM

retards advocating murdering ppl based on sexual identity run wild on forums; respectful educated and truly tolerant Nationalists get banned with the quickness. and U wanna pretend zog aint real.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 11:08 PM

http://www.pandorabots.com/pandora/talk?botid=c1baddb74e35ebd0

big_ole_jpn

07-05-2016, 11:12 PM

http://i.imgur.com/85KmhJD.png

my first jap RPG

fate is real

Daywolf

07-05-2016, 11:19 PM

Ma0gerligiliyth
the friends of the dems throw homosexuals off roof tops regularly. Dems just like islam because it's just another version of their big gov control, will not denounce it. So willing to look the other way, then cry homophobe at the only group that actually respects their right to life.

People going up like matchsticks, and it's just another reason to demonize conservatives and propel big gov forward. It is a pride issue, anything for the cause, a means to an ends, because they think they know better than the majority of the country. They have had enough people fooled to keep them in power to this point, needs to stop.

maerilith

07-05-2016, 11:32 PM

U know you got cisfem privilige on the interweb when people mansplain zog2u.

G'night pals, don't sleep in fear, it's bad for the gallbladder.

Alarti0001

07-06-2016, 12:01 PM

Well if I were I'd be about the only one that favors state rights over BIG federal gov control. How else could a sociopathic democrat force their prideful will upon everyone w/o the help of BIG FEDERAL GOVERNMENT of which even puts itself ABOVE THE LAW (e.g. Hillary Clinton the Corrupt).

You see (I know you don't) some people pref not to have our lives dictated on how we ought to live, as long as a thing doesn't intentionally harm others. Limited government (mostly local gov) with lots of liberty, you decide for yourself.

The other side (more like you) believes everyone else is below them, especially the majority, and requires a dictating BIG ass government to bend the ear of and get them to crack down on every little thing you disagree with, across the board. The cost of liberty on the sacrificial alter for some fleeting idea of safety by ultimately a big globalist world government. You will find those chains heavy.

You seem to define what you are by what you believe "the other side" is. Do you have any real identity other than not "the other side" Last I checked most of the fear based pandering to increase security was coming from the right.

I already won this thread... you're just embarrassing yourself now.

Daywolf

07-06-2016, 08:54 PM

You seem to define what you are by what you believe "the other side" is. Do you have any real identity other than not "the other side" Last I checked most of the fear based pandering to increase security was coming from the right.

I already won this thread... you're just embarrassing yourself now.wut? L2R?

Nihilist_santa

07-06-2016, 09:52 PM

wut? L2R?

Allaharti always looks like a fucking hypocrite. He is trying to pin someone down to a "side". Guy claims everyone is on the right and if you ask him to give you some names of who he considers left he never answers. Classic Allaharti.

maerilith

07-06-2016, 09:55 PM

I'm 100% happy I'm not as upset as the poster above me.

Nihilist_santa

07-06-2016, 10:00 PM

maerilith

07-06-2016, 10:03 PM

You are really subdued after this last ban Im guessing the doc had to give you some mood stabilizers to bring you back from the edge. Good luck fighting your daily urges to off yourself for being a freak.

No I took a vacation to the beach, flew solo by the moonlight, had a Mary Kay party. Enjoyed the strawberry moon. Held the door for some sexy lads.

I'm sure I did a few other things you wouldn't approve of.

Anyway REALLY DEEEEEP quesiton.

If I keep posting, will you keep posting?

Daywolf

07-06-2016, 10:12 PM

Allaharti always looks like a fucking hypocrite. He is trying to pin someone down to a "side". Guy claims everyone is on the right and if you ask him to give you some names of who he considers left he never answers. Classic Allaharti.
Really lol I think my second paragraph from what he quoted just went flying waaay over his head. so much so, the little transistors in his head started smoking :D

Yeah, what I wrote isn't exactly left or right, but classic constitutional republic as America was founded. Of course the left has shifted so far left that's considered far right now.

Alarti0001

07-06-2016, 11:53 PM

Allaharti always looks like a fucking hypocrite. He is trying to pin someone down to a "side". Guy claims everyone is on the right and if you ask him to give you some names of who he considers left he never answers. Classic Allaharti.

Finally climbing back out of your shame hole after i eviscerated you in the last thread. About time. No one has asked me who I consider to be left. I was only asked who i consider to be left outside the US.

Bernie is leftist. FDR was leftist. Noam Chomsky is leftist. A few local politicians are leftist in Seattle but you wouldn't know them(really your feeble brain doesn't understand half of what goes on here).

Really lol I think my second paragraph from what he quoted just went flying waaay over his head. so much so, the little transistors in his head started smoking :D

Yeah, what I wrote isn't exactly left or right, but classic constitutional republic as America was founded. Of course the left has shifted so far left that's considered far right now.

If my brain contains transistors yours is obviously still running on vacuum tubes. Vacuum... seems appropriate for what someone would find inside your skull.

Apparently, my post went right over you head (Not surprised). I was commenting on how you assume democrats are responsible for corruption and Big Government, but if you look at the facts (which its obvious you don't) republicans have increased the size of the government just as much. This is recent history. Educate yourself (who am I kidding, you wont)

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 12:17 AM

You a fan of Madam Sawant and Mayor Murray?

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 12:22 AM

Also, I may just be stupid, but that post looks pretty arrogant.

Daywolf

07-07-2016, 01:02 AM

If my brain contains transistors yours is obviously still running on vacuum tubes. Vacuum... seems appropriate for what someone would find inside your skull.

Apparently, my post went right over you head (Not surprised). I was commenting on how you assume democrats are responsible for corruption and Big Government, but if you look at the facts (which its obvious you don't) republicans have increased the size of the government just as much. This is recent history. Educate yourself (who am I kidding, you wont)
Really? You thought my quote (the original 3 paragraphs) was robotic like yours? When I say transistors, I'm speaking of the electronics in your head that sends and receives radio transmissions to help you know what to think as a robotic lefty. I'm not sure how my scribbling could be considered robotic, or of vacuum tubes, they don't fit with any establishment policy left, right dem or rep. It's very anti-programming.

State rights and liberty is far from a robotic position, what programming control can it have? I dooon't want everyone to be the same. I'm not prideful to force my will upon you (as you would to me), in the frame of liberty that is, and as long as it causes no one e.g. bodily harm etc.

Examples: You want to smoke pot? Go for it (I mean if it were legal now). You want to wear a dress? Sure thing! imo you should have a right to be wrong, as long as you don't try to force me to accept your choices e.g. girls bathrooms are for boys and girls etc. See I have issue with like that, and things like it. But, in the same thought, if Target (major US store) wants to do that, then I just don't go to Target any longer. However, if your city government says no the girls bathroom is for girls only, well Target can move to another city if they don't like it.

Sure, there are establishment types in the rep party, you miss like 1000 of my previous posts in this forum about how hijacked the rep party is? How many are no different than the dem party? Republicrats? What all the Rep party fighting is about? I'm like a broken record, man. I don't deny being right, though more "outcast right" (there are many types of right), a conservative (far from neocon), but I never been a registered Repub.

You live in a box, and you want to put everyone around you in some box you imagine, because that's the safe place for you. I didn't put you there. A lot of those boxes are filled with one issue people, will go along with anything as long as their one issue is addressed... or promised. That's full on robot land, man. You get your one or two issues, then programming to accept the rest. It's like troll politics, where one argues for something they really don't believe in, just so the fellow troll politicians will support your one issue later. And so many trolls with their one issue, the outcome is far from simplistic or free.

This is why the constitution was never written on 10000 pages. It's all we really need out of the fed gov. And to add all this garbage around it is just headed for a GREAT fall.

Tenlaar

07-07-2016, 03:48 AM

I dooon't want everyone to be the same. I'm not prideful to force my will upon you (as you would to me), in the frame of liberty that is, and as long as it causes no one e.g. bodily harm etc.

imo you should have a right to be wrong, as long as you don't try to force me to accept your choices e.g. girls bathrooms are for boys and girls etc.

Ohh, I get it now. You don't want to force your will upon people...unless it's something that you don't agree with them about.

Archalen

07-07-2016, 09:09 AM

Really? You thought my quote (the original 3 paragraphs) was robotic like yours? When I say transistors, I'm speaking of the electronics in your head that sends and receives radio transmissions to help you know what to think as a robotic lefty. I'm not sure how my scribbling could be considered robotic, or of vacuum tubes, they don't fit with any establishment policy left, right dem or rep. It's very anti-programming.

State rights and liberty is far from a robotic position, what programming control can it have? I dooon't want everyone to be the same. I'm not prideful to force my will upon you (as you would to me), in the frame of liberty that is, and as long as it causes no one e.g. bodily harm etc.

Examples: You want to smoke pot? Go for it (I mean if it were legal now). You want to wear a dress? Sure thing! imo you should have a right to be wrong, as long as you don't try to force me to accept your choices e.g. girls bathrooms are for boys and girls etc. See I have issue with like that, and things like it. But, in the same thought, if Target (major US store) wants to do that, then I just don't go to Target any longer. However, if your city government says no the girls bathroom is for girls only, well Target can move to another city if they don't like it.

Sure, there are establishment types in the rep party, you miss like 1000 of my previous posts in this forum about how hijacked the rep party is? How many are no different than the dem party? Republicrats? What all the Rep party fighting is about? I'm like a broken record, man. I don't deny being right, though more "outcast right" (there are many types of right), a conservative (far from neocon), but I never been a registered Repub.

You live in a box, and you want to put everyone around you in some box you imagine, because that's the safe place for you. I didn't put you there. A lot of those boxes are filled with one issue people, will go along with anything as long as their one issue is addressed... or promised. That's full on robot land, man. You get your one or two issues, then programming to accept the rest. It's like troll politics, where one argues for something they really don't believe in, just so the fellow troll politicians will support your one issue later. And so many trolls with their one issue, the outcome is far from simplistic or free.

This is why the constitution was never written on 10000 pages. It's all we really need out of the fed gov. And to add all this garbage around it is just headed for a GREAT fall.

Yes, there are nuances within the left too. You're the one who keeps going on about the left this and democrats that. The very definition of generalized thinking which is certainly a feature of robotic thinking, especially when some of your generalizations are completely false.

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 09:59 AM

Ohh, I get it now. You don't want to force your will upon people...unless it's something that you don't agree with them about.

What's wrong with private establishments deciding that? That was what Days was arguing for. There is no force there because people are free to go elsewhere or boycott that establishment if they like. That is one of the reasons legislation at a local level is preferable to legislation at a national level as well. Legislation constitutes force or compulsion. Requiring mutual consent is just a basic measure of civility.

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 10:43 AM

You a fan of Madam Sawant and Mayor Murray?

I said I considered some people to be leftist. Sawant is okay on some issues. Murray isn't a leftist.

Also, I may just be stupid, but that post looks pretty arrogant.

Arrogance is the belief you are better/smarter than someone. I don't believe I am smarter than Daywolf. I am.

Really? You thought my quote (the original 3 paragraphs) was robotic like yours? When I say transistors, I'm speaking of the electronics in your head that sends and receives radio transmissions to help you know what to think as a robotic lefty. I'm not sure how my scribbling could be considered robotic, or of vacuum tubes, they don't fit with any establishment policy left, right dem or rep. It's very anti-programming.

Yes. It's programmed language even down to the syntax. It's also a lot of what the establishment republicans preach but don't act on.

Also, do you even know what a transistor is? A transistor doesn't send radio transmissions dummy. The transistor in essence lead to miniaturization and replaced the vacuum tube in function. It apparently was an insult that went way over your head(not surprised).

State rights and liberty is far from a robotic position, what programming control can it have? I dooon't want everyone to be the same. I'm not prideful to force my will upon you (as you would to me), in the frame of liberty that is, and as long as it causes no one e.g. bodily harm etc.

States rights is almost a bedtime mantra for the repubs. You can go on Fox News and hear it repeated 20 times in a 30 minute program.

Examples: You want to smoke pot? Go for it (I mean if it were legal now). You want to wear a dress? Sure thing! imo you should have a right to be wrong, as long as you don't try to force me to accept your choices e.g. girls bathrooms are for boys and girls etc. See I have issue with like that, and things like it. But, in the same thought, if Target (major US store) wants to do that, then I just don't go to Target any longer. However, if your city government says no the girls bathroom is for girls only, well Target can move to another city if they don't like it.

See your example falls through in your own paragraph. You complain about them forcing you to share the bathroom with a transgender. Yet... if you wanted less government the bathroom would just be "Bathroom" common use for anyone. Allowing transgenders to choose their bathroom is actually closer to liberty than gender assigned bathrooms. smh

Sure, there are establishment types in the rep party, you miss like 1000 of my previous posts in this forum about how hijacked the rep party is? How many are no different than the dem party? Republicrats? What all the Rep party fighting is about? I'm like a broken record, man. I don't deny being right, though more "outcast right" (there are many types of right), a conservative (far from neocon), but I never been a registered Repub.

You're basically a libertarian(americanized)

You live in a box, and you want to put everyone around you in some box you imagine, because that's the safe place for you. I didn't put you there. A lot of those boxes are filled with one issue people, will go along with anything as long as their one issue is addressed... or promised. That's full on robot land, man. You get your one or two issues, then programming to accept the rest. It's like troll politics, where one argues for something they really don't believe in, just so the fellow troll politicians will support your one issue later. And so many trolls with their one issue, the outcome is far from simplistic or free.

You're soo right. You are the only one who sees. Thanks Alex Jones.

This is why the constitution was never written on 10000 pages. It's all we really need out of the fed gov. And to add all this garbage around it is just headed for a GREAT fall.

Sorry claiming the constitution is infallible is one of the most idiotic things you can utter. It was a document written by humans in a time period and world that doesn't exist today. Not saying the constitution is a bad thing at all but saying because it was short makes it right.... is plain idiotic.

Nihilist_santa

07-07-2016, 11:33 AM

Finally climbing back out of your shame hole after i eviscerated you in the last thread. About time. No one has asked me who I consider to be left. I was only asked who i consider to be left outside the US.

Bernie is leftist. FDR was leftist. Noam Chomsky is leftist. A few local politicians are leftist in Seattle but you wouldn't know them(really your feeble brain doesn't understand half of what goes on here).

You do realize everything you have said in the past here is still able to be viewed by everyone right? Funny it only took you about 6 threads to answer an honest and direct question.

Unfortunately you are still quite clueless. Like Hans Hermann Hoppe says the left need to be forcefully removed from society. Pinochet helicopter rides know what I mean?

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 11:49 AM

I said I considered some people to be leftist. Sawant is okay on some issues. Murray isn't a leftist.

Which issues do you agree with Sawant on? What do you think of Seattle's vagrancy problem?

See your example falls through in your own paragraph. You complain about them forcing you to share the bathroom with a transgender. Yet... if you wanted less government the bathroom would just be "Bathroom" common use for anyone. Allowing transgenders to choose their bathroom is actually closer to liberty than gender assigned bathrooms. smh

I think at least the three of us agree on this. I think the issue though is denying others the right to decline. There should be no laws prohibiting or compelling restroom usage. Private establishments should be free to implement restrooms as they see fit and public institutions should cater to both or neither. Thoughts?

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 01:21 PM

You a fan of Madam Sawant and Mayor Murray?

Also, I may just be stupid, but that post looks pretty arrogant.

You do realize everything you have said in the past here is still able to be viewed by everyone right? Funny it only took you about 6 threads to answer an honest and direct question.

Unfortunately you are still quite clueless. Like Hans Hermann Hoppe says the left need to be forcefully removed from society. Pinochet helicopter rides know what I mean?

You have yet to answer a question. You always evade and end up hiding or not responding for weeks until the question blows over.

Who cares what Hans said? He tries to create a utopia anarchist society, but all he is doing is story-telling. Nothing substantial backs his utopia that wouldn't also back any other story. His way is basically a religion that you need Faith to believe in. Crackpot.

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 01:24 PM

Nihilist_santa

07-07-2016, 01:30 PM

You have yet to answer a question. You always evade and end up hiding or not responding for weeks until the question blows over.

Who cares what Hans said? He tries to create a utopia anarchist society, but all he is doing is story-telling. Nothing substantial backs his utopia that wouldn't also back any other story. His way is basically a religion that you need Faith to believe in. Crackpot.

You havent asked shit. You havent presented any facts. You just sound rustled at this point. Hiding? Didnt you and your guild get griefed off of red bro?

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 01:46 PM

You havent asked shit. You havent presented any facts. You just sound rustled at this point. Hiding? Didnt you and your guild get griefed off of red bro?

I've asked many question you just choose not to (or are uncapable of) answering them.
Facts bruh.

Just the most recent one where you fled. http://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=245819&page=15

Also red server has nothing to do with political discussion? Are you really this stupid (rhetorical question, of course you are)?

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 04:05 PM

I do enjoy answering your questions... the only problem is I am the only one who answers them. So it's a 2-way discussion that never includes the few dumb trolls in these threads. This allows them to comment on my thoughts or not comment at all without offering anything of their own. If you want to have a meaningful 2-way discussion feel free to message me.
Otherwise, I challenge you to include these other people to also comment on your questions (which generally I find quite good).

I shall try! They seem more interested in you than me though lol.

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 04:09 PM

I shall try! They seem more interested in you than me though lol.

They're most interested spouting nonsense without having to support it... ever.

big_ole_jpn

07-07-2016, 04:21 PM

it's a 2-way discussion that never includes the few dumb trolls in these threads. This allows them to comment on my thoughts or not comment at all without offering anything of their own. If you want to have a meaningful 2-way discussion feel free to message me.

Griefed off the thread. Thanks for playing!

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 04:22 PM

Which issues do you agree with Sawant on? What do you think of Seattle's vagrancy problem?

I think at least the three of us agree on this. I think the issue though is denying others the right to decline. There should be no laws prohibiting or compelling restroom usage. Private establishments should be free to implement restrooms as they see fit and public institutions should cater to both or neither. Thoughts?

Wolfs, what you think about this? You mentioned local legislation in your post above. I think that is preferable to federal legislation, but still think that no legislation is ideal. There is a certain level of conformity that should be expected and is in fact necessary in any community. I think one of the challenges in the US is the fact that people are far more spread out than many other parts of the world, making it difficult to escape disagreeable communities or form new ones in many areas. Thoughts?

Santa, what are your thoughts? You've expressed more authoritarian viewpoints while expressing concerns about the effects of degeneracy on others through simple exposure, but have also indicated you mostly want to be left alone. I strongly sympathize with the latter and can understand concern of the former, but I think the former is easily remedied by protecting one's right to decline, which fortunately is currently largely uninhibited.

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 04:23 PM

Griefed off the thread. Thanks for playing!

Lol

Daywolf

07-07-2016, 08:18 PM

See your example falls through in your own paragraph. You complain about them forcing you to share the bathroom with a transgender. Yet... if you wanted less government the bathroom would just be "Bathroom" common use for anyone. Allowing transgenders to choose their bathroom is actually closer to liberty than gender assigned bathrooms. smh
Not at all. That's about as moronic as the lefts interpretation of freedom of speech or freedom of religion as to being "freedom from" and all their declared public safe places they squat in like dogs.

So, social Marxist, eh? Fk your Marxism, there are plenty of other countries you can move to if you really like that stuff. To remove moral laws and common decency is harmful, not just emotionally but even physically. I reject it on principle. The only way you can get that enacted into law is to have your BIG GOV force it on everyone since few to no cities or states where people actually vote will allow it. Just like California voted down same sex marriage, but a judge over ruled the vote. I trust the vote of the majority over the few SJW's out there forcing this dictatorship on us all. The left cries for "democracy" until it becomes inconvenient to them... which is most of the time.

The left really has your mind twisted with their Marxism, man. I don't think the book 1984 was meant to be so prophetic, but wow so many craving for it now, it's hard to ignore.

And no I'm not libertarian. They are not the only ones that have such views on liberty and a strong belief in the constitution (hint: think of a party that starts with C and that's the one I've been in over 25yrs) ... though the LP took a huge step to the left with their current candidate which made me sad :(

late edit, hadn't read following posts yet
I think at least the three of us agree on this. I think the issue though is denying others the right to decline. There should be no laws prohibiting or compelling restroom usage. Private establishments should be free to implement restrooms as they see fit and public institutions should cater to both or neither. Thoughts?See above. Also keep in mind the context of what he was quoting. I put it in the realm of state and/or local government decision, which is usually done by the voters. I'm not speaking of a huge federal law mandating morality as dems and the left strive for. It's all Orwellian imo.

You know, just like with San Francisco. It was actually legal to walk around the city in public, totally nekid. Only fat old homosexuals actually did, but it was legal. That was the will of the people... well until they got so disgusted with feces being left behind on seats and benches. So the voters said carry a cloth or napkin whatever and put it down then sit. The old fat gays didn't like that and refused to. So the voters made it illegal to be nude in public in their city. That's the system actually working! Leaving feces around like that is harmful. Even SF gets it!

And lets face it, when a dem/lib wants a law, it's a law on everyone else, but not on them. Word.
edit done

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 08:43 PM

Not at all. That's about as moronic as the lefts interpretation of freedom of speech or freedom of religion as to being "freedom from" and all their declared public safe places they squat in like dogs.

Show me where the left translates freedom of religion or speech as freedom from? Can you support anything you say? Like at all? Serious questions.

So, social Marxist, eh? Fk your Marxism, there are plenty of other countries you can move to if you really like that stuff. To remove moral laws and common decency is harmful, not just emotionally but even physically. I reject it on principle. The only way you can get that enacted into law is to have your BIG GOV force it on everyone since few to no cities or states where people actually vote will allow it. Just like California voted down same sex marriage, but a judge over ruled the vote. I trust the vote of the majority over the few SJW's out there forcing this dictatorship on us all. The left cries for "democracy" until it becomes inconvenient to them... which is most of the time.

Please demonstrate social marxism. Also where is the morality here? Where does morality come from? Is morality standard? You assume a lot and can't seem to prove anything.

The left really has your mind twisted with their Marxism, man. I don't think the book 1984 was meant to be so prophetic, but wow so many craving for it now, it's hard to ignore.

Please explain how anything I said was related to Marxism. This should be hilarious. I'll be waiting.

And no I'm not libertarian. They are not the only ones that have such views on liberty and a strong belief in the constitution (hint: think of a party that starts with C and that's the one I've been in over 25yrs) ... though the LP took a huge step to the left with their current candidate which made me sad :(

Arguing with you is like arguing with a child. Your mind is too simple to understand the concepts in play. Libertarian is more than a political party... is existed long before the party. Stop trying to cram everything into to parties.... Fuck you're brainwashed.. it's evident in how you can't separate your thinking from the programmed politics of the US.

Pokesan

07-07-2016, 08:43 PM

You know, just like with San Francisco. It was actually legal to walk around the city in public, totally nekid. Only fat old homosexuals actually did, but it was legal. That was the will of the people... well until they got so disgusted with feces being left behind on seats and benches. So the voters said carry a cloth or napkin whatever and put it down then sit. The old fat gays didn't like that and refused to. So the voters made it illegal to be nude in public in their city. That's the system actually working! Leaving feces around like that is harmful.

the napkin law should have been ruled unconstitutional as it specifically targetted gay men(a group well known for their loose anii).

Daywolf

07-07-2016, 09:23 PM

Please explain how anything I said was related to Marxism. This should be hilarious. I'll be waiting.The bathroom issue stems from social/cultural Marxism, duh? You SJW Marxists want to force totalitarian rule through such battles, over time. Then again, you may be just too dumb to realize :rolleyes: ...rather than just playing dumb hmmmm.. but that is part of their goal for control.
You don't even know what brainwashing is, bud. I'm sure you never bothered to follow any of my Bernays links. They have you hook, line and sinker, by definition of their own writings on how to do it, of which your liberal politicians praise the writings of. You pretty much put out textbook propaganda by result of your indoctrination.

Alarti0001

07-07-2016, 10:16 PM

The bathroom issue stems from social/cultural Marxism, duh? You SJW Marxists want to force totalitarian rule through such battles, over time. Then again, you may be just too dumb to realize :rolleyes: ...rather than just playing dumb hmmmm.. but that is part of their goal for control.
You don't even know what brainwashing is, bud. I'm sure you never bothered to follow any of my Bernays links. They have you hook, line and sinker, by definition of their own writings on how to do it, of which your liberal politicians praise the writings of. You pretty much put out textbook propaganda by result of your indoctrination.

So again. You keep saying things.. you keep demonstrating you are unable to prove anything. Please demonstrate the Marxism in effect. Can you? Saying something is marxist doesn't make it marxist.. even if you wish really really hard.

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 10:42 PM

late edit, hadn't read following posts yet
See above. Also keep in mind the context of what he was quoting. I put it in the realm of state and/or local government decision, which is usually done by the voters. I'm not speaking of a huge federal law mandating morality as dems and the left strive for. It's all Orwellian imo.

You know, just like with San Francisco. It was actually legal to walk around the city in public, totally nekid. Only fat old homosexuals actually did, but it was legal. That was the will of the people... well until they got so disgusted with feces being left behind on seats and benches. So the voters said carry a cloth or napkin whatever and put it down then sit. The old fat gays didn't like that and refused to. So the voters made it illegal to be nude in public in their city. That's the system actually working! Leaving feces around like that is harmful. Even SF gets it!

And lets face it, when a dem/lib wants a law, it's a law on everyone else, but not on them. Word.
edit done

Yeah, poo is no good and I favor local law over state law over federal law because it is people governing themselves as they see fit. However, private establishments should be less restricted than public ones. For example, if the old fat gays in your example wanted to open a au naturale coffee shop rife with shit stained seats, they should be free to do that so long as they are not disrupting public space by flaunting their unattractive figures in Windows or something.

That is my point on bathrooms. If Chic-Fil-A decides it is a traditional establishment and define bathroom usage one way, they should be free to do that. And Dairy Queen should be free to do it differently if they choose to. If we don't like the policies of one or the other, we don't have to go there.

Daywolf

07-07-2016, 11:32 PM

So again. You keep saying things.. you keep demonstrating you are unable to prove anything. Please demonstrate the Marxism in effect. Can you? Saying something is marxist doesn't make it marxist.. even if you wish really really hard.https://youtu.be/ZIO4oSLwK3A

maskedmelon

07-07-2016, 11:46 PM

https://youtu.be/ZIO4oSLwK3A

So cultural Marxism is instigating conflict by making people think they are oppressed? That makes sense in the context of modern US leftism. That is precisely what I dislike about leftist ideology. I am not sure I have seen Alarti on the victimhood bandwagon so much though.

I would be curious to see a follow up from him and you on my bathroom questions though^^

big_ole_jpn

07-08-2016, 12:17 AM

https://youtu.be/ZIO4oSLwK3A

And then he was killed.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:18 AM

So cultural Marxism is instigating conflict by making people think they are oppressed? That makes sense in the context of modern US leftism. That is precisely what I dislike about leftist ideology. I am not sure I have seen Alarti on the victimhood bandwagon so much though.

I would be curious to see a follow up from him and you on my bathroom questions though^^

Here is my opinion of bathrooms. I don't give a shit.. well I might be giving a shit in the bathroom... I don't care who is in there.

As far as gender goes... the science says that gender is in the brain. Personal identity is in the brain. Just like how who I am exists in my brain... and if I lost a penis in 'Nam I'd still be male.

As for cultural marxism... rofl. Conspiracy theory popularized recently by the tea party dudes

Guess we got you figured out Daywolf. You're just a little neo-nazi aren't you.

The message is numbingly simplistic: all the ills of modern American culture, from feminism, affirmative action, sexual liberation and gay rights to the decay of traditional education and even environmentalism are ultimately attributable to the insidious influence of the members of the Institute for Social Research who came to America in the 1930's."[72]

"Dr. Heidi Beirich likewise claims the concept is used to demonize "feminists, homosexuals, secular humanists, multiculturalist, sex educators, environmentalist, immigrants, and black nationalists."

"According to Chip Berlet, who specializes in the study of extreme right-wing movements, the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory found fertile ground within the Tea Party movement of 2009, with contributions published in the American Thinker and WorldNetDaily highlighted by some Tea Party websites"

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:20 AM

https://youtu.be/ZIO4oSLwK3A

A video of a guy basically explaining about how Noam Chomsky writes in a way he can't read. /golfclap for a dumb guy.

Is this like when a republican complains about a law being more than a page long. Reading is tough!

Also, his words aren't evidence and have been refuted. Try again little boy.

Daywolf

07-08-2016, 12:51 AM

And then he was killed.
Yes he was. And his videos and books are still constantly referenced and quoted. The guy had remarkable insight. Editor of the Drudge Report, helped create the Huffington Post, founder of breitbart.com among other sites. Wrote books, conducted sting operations (i.e. ACORN etc), even exposed the famed Anthony Wiener pics.

@Alarti0001 You live in a fantasy world where you expect an ideology to be turned into some tangible object before you recognize it. Not all ideologies of course, just the ones that expose your words as complete dribble. If Ima little boy then you must still be in your embryonic state praying you dunt get aborted and your brains sucked out into a coffee can. Then again, have a brain scan lately?

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 09:13 AM

Here is my opinion of bathrooms. I don't give a shit.. well I might be giving a shit in the bathroom... I don't care who is in there.

As far as gender goes... the science says that gender is in the brain. Personal identity is in the brain. Just like how who I am exists in my brain... and if I lost a penis in 'Nam I'd still be male.

I don't care about bathrooms either, but it serves to ilkustrate a valuable point on the meaning and value of liberty as a principle. What do you think about people's rights to decline to participate? Obviously participation in some things must be mandated, but I do not see the necessity of legislation in social issues like these. Why shouldn't Burger King be free to run their bathrooms as they see fit?

As for gender being in the brain, gender has been pretty clearly defined as analogous to sex, which is very narrowly defined. Sure character and identity are in the brain, but so are intelligence and mental illness. People should be free to do as they like so long as their behavior does not harm others, but delusion should not be used as the golden standard for validating abnormal behavior.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 09:19 AM

That is my point on bathrooms. If Chic-Fil-A decides it is a traditional establishment and define bathroom usage one way, they should be free to do that. And Dairy Queen should be free to do it differently if they choose to. If we don't like the policies of one or the other, we don't have to go there.

Daywolf what do you think about this? I am curious because it speaks to the level of liberty one embraces. Something that I would see as analogous to this is legislated smoking bans in private establishments. If private establishments choose to allow their patrons to smoke that should be their business. The government should not be dictating what people can do in private establishments so long as nobody is harmed.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 10:26 AM

I don't care about bathrooms either, but it serves to ilkustrate a valuable point on the meaning and value of liberty as a principle. What do you think about people's rights to decline to participate? Obviously participation in some things must be mandated, but I do not see the necessity of legislation in social issues like these. Why shouldn't Burger King be free to run their bathrooms as they see fit?

As for gender being in the brain, gender has been pretty clearly defined as analogous to sex, which is very narrowly defined. Sure character and identity are in the brain, but so are intelligence and mental illness. People should be free to do as they like so long as their behavior does not harm others, but delusion should not be used as the golden standard for validating abnormal behavior.

The real question is why should Burger King be allowed to discriminate? Burger king isn't an individual. An individual can discriminate.
Basically, why should Burger King be allowed to remove the liberty of US citizens.

I think you can pretty easily separate gender and delusion? Mental healthiness is in the brain too after all. You wouldn't say a person is mentally unstable because the shape of a finger... unless the science you understand is circa 500AD

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 10:28 AM

@Alarti0001 You live in a fantasy world where you expect an ideology to be turned into some tangible object before you recognize it. Not all ideologies of course, just the ones that expose your words as complete dribble. If Ima little boy then you must still be in your embryonic state praying you dunt get aborted and your brains sucked out into a coffee can. Then again, have a brain scan lately?

Like cool opinion boy. You could totally prove me wrong... if only you could prove one of your statements true. Wait... you can't. :sadface!

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 10:34 AM

The real question is why should Burger King be allowed to discriminate? Burger king isn't an individual. An individual can discriminate.
Basically, why should Burger King be allowed to remove the liberty of US citizens.

I think you can pretty easily separate gender and delusion? Mental healthiness is in the brain too after all. You wouldn't say a person is mentally unstable because the shape of a finger... unless the science you understand is circa 500AD

I like how you didn't answer her question you just rephrased it and put it in her lap. :cool:

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 10:43 AM

I like how you didn't answer her question you just rephrased it and put it in her lap. :cool:

If you think about it a little(Or in your case alot). You might realize I actually did answer her question.

STILL waiting on your answers to my questions (guessing you can't).

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 10:51 AM

Ask the question here friend since you cant adequately link me to the question you asked (go back and read your post it doesn't address me).

So you say you answered her? Where? All you did was say why should they be able to. You didn't give any kind of reasoning or evidence. If you are going on the individual issue then corporations are entitled to the same rights as individuals (personhood) and should be allowed to discriminate. Also no rights or liberties are harmed in being refused a burger. You should do some research as to what your rights actually are.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 10:53 AM

The real question is why should Burger King be allowed to discriminate? Burger king isn't an individual. An individual can discriminate.
Basically, why should Burger King be allowed to remove the liberty of US citizens.

Why shouldn't it be? It already does with male-feme bathrooms. It is a private establishment and it does not infringe upon anyone's liberty, because individuals are not required to visit the establishment.

I think you can pretty easily separate gender and delusion? Mental healthiness is in the brain too after all. You wouldn't say a person is mentally unstable because the shape of a finger... unless the science you understand is circa 500AD

The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex. If you believe that you are a man when you do not posses a Y chromosome and do produce eggs, then you are delusional. If you believe that you are a woman when you have a y chromosome and produce sperm cells, then you are delusional. Separating and then confusing the terms gender and sex does not make it any more rational. You can be a masculine woman or a feminine man and choose to live as you perceive one or the other, but to believe you actually are is delusion.

Daywolf

07-08-2016, 10:58 AM

Daywolf what do you think about this? I am curious because it speaks to the level of liberty one embraces. Something that I would see as analogous to this is legislated smoking bans in private establishments. If private establishments choose to allow their patrons to smoke that should be their business. The government should not be dictating what people can do in private establishments so long as nobody is harmed.

Examples: You want to smoke pot? Go for it (I mean if it were legal now). You want to wear a dress? Sure thing! imo you should have a right to be wrong, as long as you don't try to force me to accept your choices e.g. girls bathrooms are for boys and girls etc. See I have issue with like that, and things like it. But, in the same thought, if Target (major US store) wants to do that, then I just don't go to Target any longer. However, if your city government says no the girls bathroom is for girls only, well Target can move to another city if they don't like it.
As long as state/local gov allows them to make that choice, which pref is by the vote of the people of that state or county etc. Pretty much been one of my points through the thread and called out as being a libertarian for it lol. The less regulation by the feds the better. You know fed law makers use to only work part time? Now it's serious business... with something like 300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally as well as some 5000+ federal criminal laws. Just in the past ten years, the amount of federal laws have grown ~25%, counting the entire history of the US. This is a major shift in this country, needs to stop.

Hey Alarti0001, prove to me you are an actual person and not some robot. Oh, can't use words, right.. and you gotta do it three times in proper order while spinning around backwards reciting Shakespeare's Macbeth in reverse. Ok, now begin..

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:00 AM

Ask the question here friend since you cant adequately link me to the question you asked (go back and read your post it doesn't address me).

I've asked many question you just choose not to (or are uncapable of) answering them.
Facts bruh.

Just the most recent one where you fled. http://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=245819&page=15

Also red server has nothing to do with political discussion? Are you really this stupid (rhetorical question, of course you are)?

So you say you answered her? Where? All you did was say why should they be able to. You didn't give any kind of reasoning or evidence. If you are going on the individual issue then corporations are entitled to the same rights as individuals (personhood) and should be allowed to discriminate. Also no rights or liberties are harmed in being refused a burger. You should do some research as to what your rights actually are.

It's like you are in a competition for the world's most stupid human. Corporations in now way should be entitled to the same rights as individuals. Unless you can somehow see corporations now having corporate rights for corporate children. This child is now the property of Carl's Junior (Idiocracy).

If some people are refused food at every location than you can in effect starve a targeted group of people.

You know those unalienable rights. Very inconvenient for a troglodyte racist like yourself.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:01 AM

As long as state/local gov allows them to make that choice, which pref is by the vote of the people of that state or county etc. Pretty much been one of my points through the thread and called out as being a libertarian for it lol. The less regulation by the feds the better. You know fed law makers use to only work part time? Now it's serious business... with something like 300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally as well as some 5000+ federal criminal laws. Just in the past ten years, the amount of federal laws have grown ~25%, counting the entire history of the US. This is a major shift in this country, needs to stop.

Hey Alarti0001, prove to me you are an actual person and not some robot. Oh, can't use words, right.. and you gotta do it three times in proper order while spinning around backwards reciting Shakespeare's Macbeth in reverse. Ok, now begin..

Why do you keep avoiding meaningful discussion? I'm asking for a basic standard of proof. Its elementary logic kiddo. Grow up.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:04 AM

Why shouldn't it be? It already does with male-feme bathrooms. It is a private establishment and it does not infringe upon anyone's liberty, because individuals are not required to visit the establishment.

The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex. If you believe that you are a man when you do not posses a Y chromosome and do produce eggs, then you are delusional. If you believe that you are a woman when you have a y chromosome and produce sperm cells, then you are delusional. Separating and then confusing the terms gender and sex does not make it any more rational. You can be a masculine woman or a feminine man and choose to live as you perceive one or the other, but to believe you actually are is delusion.

There is an often cited study in which twins were used. One twin had a botched circumcision from a laser procedure that destroyed his genitals. Doctors told the family that without his penis the boy would have problems coping so they tried to force the child to be a female. They never told him he was born male and the doctor tried all kinds of weird shit like making the twins simulate sex positions in some attempt to retune the boy into adopting female sexuality. Long story short the boy refused to accept being a female and chose to later live his life as the male he was born as before committing suicide. Interpret that however you wish. Ive seen a multitude of interpretations both pro and anti trans. I fall in the anti crowd obviously.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:08 AM

It's like you are in a competition for the world's most stupid human. Corporations in now way should be entitled to the same rights as individuals. Unless you can somehow see corporations now having corporate rights for corporate children. This child is now the property of Carl's Junior (Idiocracy).

If some people are refused food at every location than you can in effect starve a targeted group of people.

You know those unalienable rights. Very inconvenient for a troglodyte racist like yourself.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Seriously dude you are employing childish logic. No one is FORCED to buy food from Burger King and so they have other options meaning they wont starve. As far as corporations they already have personhood so dont argue with me about it. Its a done deal. 14th amendment bro.

That preamble was written by whites land owners for white land owners. They didn't envision the multicultural monstrosity we would become.

Daywolf

07-08-2016, 11:12 AM

Why do you keep avoiding meaningful discussion? I'm asking for a basic standard of proof. Its elementary logic kiddo. Grow up.

I found where Alarti0001 lives online http://www.cleverbot.com/
Now it all makes sense!

Breitbart answered it spot on, it's your own problem you cant make sense of it.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:14 AM

Why shouldn't it be? It already does with male-feme bathrooms. It is a private establishment and it does not infringe upon anyone's liberty, because individuals are not required to visit the establishment.

"It already does" Is never a good argument. You seem to be arguing based on basic liberty that you wan't the government to have more control of food, services etc so that corporations can deny liberty? It might be a private establishment but it exists within the US government. A person is no less of a person on the street than in a building.

The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex. If you believe that you are a man when you do not posses a Y chromosome and do produce eggs, then you are delusional. If you believe that you are a woman when you have a y chromosome and produce sperm cells, then you are delusional. Separating and then confusing the terms gender and sex does not make it any more rational. You can be a masculine woman or a feminine man and choose to live as you perceive one or the other, but to believe you actually are is delusion.

Sorry that doesn't hold on to the basic variation of human life. It would probably be somewhat true in most of the animal kingdom where the only purpose of that life is survival and procreation.
Considering basic natural mutation, and chromosomal anomalies. A women, by your definition, XX and a man XY. What is an XXX is this person more of a woman than you? Less of a woman? Some new gender? All the chromosome does is tell the bodies what organs to develop and what hormones to pump out.

When a man ages and they start producing less testosterone is he becoming less of a man? If a woman has a hysterectomy does she lose her gender?

Does a male lion think of itself as a man? The animal kingdom doesn't have conscious self awareness . Gender is a concept humanity created to help identify ourselves.

A person's SEX is about biological equipment.

Don't confuse Gender and Sex.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:16 AM

I found where Alarti0001 lives online http://www.cleverbot.com/
Now it all makes sense!

Breitbart answered it spot on, it's your own problem you cant make sense of it.

No Daywolf... you seem to not be able to make sense of it. If you can it would be simple for you to explain it.. yet you don't.
Seriously dude you are employing childish logic. No one is FORCED to buy food from Burger King and so they have other options meaning they wont starve. As far as corporations they already have personhood so dont argue with me about it. Its a done deal. 14th amendment bro.

That preamble was written by whites land owners for white land owners. They didn't envision the multicultural monstrosity we would become.
Yet if every food place adopted burger kings supposed ideas.. then they wouldnt have food. Speaking of childish logic LOL!.

Ummm maybe you should read the 14th amendment. It's not about corporations.

White didn't even exist. People identified from their euro origins. White is a concept designed to control the working poor and present a common enemy (the slaves). Either way.. the US at those times was already multicultural. Catholic, protestants, Irish, English, German, French etc. These were cultures that fought wars among each other for centuries. The Irish were the original low class "ghetto people".

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:19 AM

"It already does" Is never a good argument. You seem to be arguing based on basic liberty that you wan't the government to have more control of food, services etc so that corporations can deny liberty? It might be a private establishment but it exists within the US government. A person is no less of a person on the street than in a building.

Sorry that doesn't hold on to the basic variation of human life. It would probably be somewhat true in most of the animal kingdom where the only purpose of that life is survival and procreation.
Considering basic natural mutation, and chromosomal anomalies. A women, by your definition, XX and a man XY. What is an XXX is this person more of a woman than you? Less of a woman? Some new gender? All the chromosome does is tell the bodies what organs to develop and what hormones to pump out.

When a man ages and they start producing less testosterone is he becoming less of a man? If a woman has a hysterectomy does she lose her gender?

Does a male lion think of itself as a man? The animal kingdom doesn't have conscious self awareness . Gender is a concept humanity created to help identify ourselves.

A person's SEX is about biological equipment.

Don't confuse Gender and Sex.

So Maerlith is crazy then? Gender is a social construct right? So how can there be a medical reason for "gender dysphoria" ?

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 11:28 AM

There is an often cited study in which twins were used. One twin had a botched circumcision from a laser procedure that destroyed his genitals. Doctors told the family that without his penis the boy would have problems coping so they tried to force the child to be a female. They never told him he was born male and the doctor tried all kinds of weird shit like making the twins simulate sex positions in some attempt to retune the boy into adopting female sexuality. Long story short the boy refused to accept being a female and chose to later live his life as the male he was born as before committing suicide. Interpret that however you wish. Ive seen a multitude of interpretations both pro and anti trans. I fall in the anti crowd obviously.

I am not sure what to think about that other than it is sad. I don't see how it plays into the gender-sex word play arguments or helps to validate delusion over rational choices based on inclinations, which is the point I was making or trying to make. I suppose it does tie-in to the overall discussion of pride though. One of the biggest reasons for transgender elevated suicide/depression rates stems from false beliefs perpetuated by counselors, politicians and media that you can be something you are not. It results in perpetual dissatisfaction because no matter how much you tell yourself its true and no matter how close you appear to be, there will be differences and every other rational person will remind you of them (whether intentional or not). Avoidance is not a path to happiness.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 11:39 AM

"It already does" Is never a good argument. You seem to be arguing based on basic liberty that you wan't the government to have more control of food, services etc so that corporations can deny liberty? It might be a private establishment but it exists within the US government. A person is no less of a person on the street than in a building.

You ignored my point on current male-female bathrooms. Is that a denial of liberty? Should establishments be prohibited from segregating bathrooms at all?

Sorry that doesn't hold on to the basic variation of human life.

It is how the words are defined. Pull out a dictionary. Whether you or I like it or not, that is how it is. Redefine the terms if you like. That effort is currently underway and will only lead to more misery.

It would probably be somewhat true in most of the animal kingdom where the only purpose of that life is survival and procreation.
Considering basic natural mutation, and chromosomal anomalies. A women, by your definition, XX and a man XY. What is an XXX is this person more of a woman than you? Less of a woman? Some new gender? All the chromosome does is tell the bodies what organs to develop and what hormones to pump out.

When a man ages and they start producing less testosterone is he becoming less of a man? If a woman has a hysterectomy does she lose her gender?

Does a male lion think of itself as a man? The animal kingdom doesn't have conscious self awareness . Gender is a concept humanity created to help identify ourselves.

A person's SEX is about biological equipment.

Don't confuse Gender and Sex.

Man and Woman are defined as male and female which are sex terms. That is my point. Pull out a dictionary. You can redefine them or create new terms, but the current terms are what they are.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:48 AM

A person's SEX is about biological equipment.

Don't confuse Gender and Sex.

So Maerlith is crazy then? Gender is a social construct right? So how can there be a medical reason for "gender dysphoria" ?

Can you even read?

Gender Dysphoria: the condition of feeling one's emotional and psychological identity as male or female to be opposite to one's biological sex.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:49 AM

That doesn't mesh with your contention that gender is a social construct.

ETA: What is the point of reference for a male to "feel" female?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:51 AM

You ignored my point on current male-female bathrooms. Is that a denial of liberty? Should establishments be prohibited from segregating bathrooms at all?
I answered this question earlier that I think designation sex to a bathroom is less liberty than allowing a bathroom to just be a place to expel waste. I figured you would remember.

It is how the words are defined. Pull out a dictionary. Whether you or I like it or not, that is how it is. Redefine the terms if you like. That effort is currently underway and will only lead to more misery.

Man and Woman are defined as male and female which are sex terms. That is my point. Pull out a dictionary. You can redefine them or create new terms, but the current terms are what they are.

I agree the current definitions are pretty good. maybe you should learn them.

Okay Dictionary defintion

Gender: gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Sex: sex
seks/Submit
noun
1.
(chiefly with reference to people) sexual activity, including specifically sexual intercourse.
"he enjoyed talking about sex"
synonyms: sexual intercourse, intercourse, lovemaking, making love, sex act, (sexual) relations; More
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

Take your own advice now.
You can redefine them or create new terms, but the current terms are what they are.

Thanks for playing !

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:53 AM

That doesn't mesh with your contention that gender is a social construct.

ETA: What is the point of reference for a male to "feel" female?

This varies based on culture. In thailand for example gender is very fluid. What a man or woman is "supposed" to feel/behave is defined by the culture and upbringing that surrounds you.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 11:54 AM

I answered this question earlier that I think designation sex to a bathroom is less liberty than allowing a bathroom to just be a place to expel waste. I figured you would remember.

I agree the current definitions are pretty good. maybe you should learn them.

Okay Dictionary defintion

Gender: gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Sex: sex
seks/Submit
noun
1.
(chiefly with reference to people) sexual activity, including specifically sexual intercourse.
"he enjoyed talking about sex"
synonyms: sexual intercourse, intercourse, lovemaking, making love, sex act, (sexual) relations; More
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

Take your own advice now.
You can redefine them or create new terms, but the current terms are what they are.

Thanks for playing !

You've lost.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:54 AM

Lost badly. Can see the smoldering wreckage from here.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:55 AM

You've lost.

Except I used your standard to demonstrate how ill-informed you are. Sorry, but I won :)

I am not sure what to think about that other than it is sad. I don't see how it plays into the gender-sex word play arguments or helps to validate delusion over rational choices based on inclinations, which is the point I was making or trying to make. I suppose it does tie-in to the overall discussion of pride though. One of the biggest reasons for transgender elevated suicide/depression rates stems from false beliefs perpetuated by counselors, politicians and media that you can be something you are not. It results in perpetual dissatisfaction because no matter how much you tell yourself its true and no matter how close you appear to be, there will be differences and every other rational person will remind you of them (whether intentional or not). Avoidance is not a path to happiness.

Also do you have anything to support this?

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:56 AM

This varies based on culture. In thailand for example gender is very fluid. What a man or woman is "supposed" to feel/behave is defined by the culture and upbringing that surrounds you.

The study I mentioned proved that wrong. They purposely tried to make a male believe he was female. They used role play , surgery, and other methods and the child fell back on his biological identity. Therefore your surroundings ,cultural upbringing etc are not what determines gender.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:58 AM

It is how the words are defined. Pull out a dictionary.

Man and Woman are defined as male and female which are sex terms. Pull out a dictionary. .

Okay Dictionary

Gender: gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Sex: sex
seks/Submit
noun
1.
(chiefly with reference to people) sexual activity, including specifically sexual intercourse.
"he enjoyed talking about sex"
synonyms: sexual intercourse, intercourse, lovemaking, making love, sex act, (sexual) relations; More
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

Take your own advice now.
You can redefine them or create new terms, but the current terms are what they are.

Thanks for playing !

GG no Re

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:00 PM

So if I post a definition from an older dictionary can I declare premature victory as well?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:02 PM

The study I mentioned proved that wrong. They purposely tried to make a male believe he was female. They used role play , surgery, and other methods and the child fell back on his biological identity. Therefore your surroundings ,cultural upbringing etc are not what determines gender.

Do you understand science? Or statistics? Or even my point?

First of all your study:

Its no where even close to enough to be making the logical leaps you are. 1 case study on one person only describes what happened in one person. The sample size is entirely too small. Secondly, if anything all that study does, if it was better science, is goes to enhance my point, that gender is in the brain. You don't need a penis to have gender... which is what I was saying just a couple posts ago.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:04 PM

Except I used your standard to demonstrate how ill-informed you are. Sorry, but I won :)

Yeah, except you didn't. Go pull the definitions for male, female and man/woman. The, apply that understanding to the definition of gender. You will see that man is defined as an adult human male and woman is defined as an adult human female. And you will see that male and female are defined as I have defined them (or closely). There is no reference to gender in either. And if gender is a social construct the. It is even less relevant to the terms man/woman.

Also do you have anything to support this?

Nope.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:05 PM

So if I post a definition from an older dictionary can I declare premature victory as well?

Sure I'll just continue to laugh at your idiocy for very obvious reasons.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:09 PM

Do you understand science? Or statistics? Or even my point?

First of all your study:

Its no where even close to enough to be making the logical leaps you are. 1 case study on one person only describes what happened in one person. The sample size is entirely too small. Secondly, if anything all that study does, if it was better science, is goes to enhance my point, that gender is in the brain. You don't need a penis to have gender... which is what I was saying just a couple posts ago.

That study is called facts friend. I recall you seem to like facts but here you are arguing against facts. I think you just want to be right and have no interest in an honest discussion. Laugh all you want man if it makes you feel better that no one is agreeing with you.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:11 PM

Yeah, except you didn't. Go pull the definitions for male, female and man/woman. The, apply that understanding to the definition of gender. You will see that man is defined as an adult human male and woman is defined as an adult human female. And you will see that male and female are defined as I have defined them (or closely). There is no reference to gender in either. And if gender is a social construct the. It is even less relevant to the terms man/woman.

Nope.

I know its embarrassing to be refuted so easily on your own standard of evidence but the description in the dictionary must be taken in whole form. You don't get to cherry pick to support your premature conclusions.

The purpose of a dictionary is to DEFINE a word, you don't get to ignore pieces of the definition at your convenience.

typically used with reference to social or cultural differences rather than biological ones.

Gender: gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Sex: sex
seks/Submit
noun
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

In case you were wondering Reproduction is a biological function.

Sorry for your pride.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:12 PM

Do you understand science? Or statistics? Or even my point?

First of all your study:

Its no where even close to enough to be making the logical leaps you are. 1 case study on one person only describes what happened in one person. The sample size is entirely too small. Secondly, if anything all that study does, if it was better science, is goes to enhance my point, that gender is in the brain. You don't need a penis to have gender... which is what I was saying just a couple posts ago.

But he did have a penis it was just removed and he never knew about that during the study. Come on man they teach this case in real schools. I know when you printed out your diploma from the University of Phoenix Online you rushed here to show everyone how smart you are but this is a well known case. It is at the crux of the nature/nurture issue and because of ethics regulations we likely wont get anything similar for awhile until all of these forced trans kids delaying puberty start offing themselves.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:13 PM

Also Alarti,

From page 12:

The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex.

I think you've been sticking to the gender-sex argument because that is more ambiguous and why I abandoned it, to clarify the issue at hand: male/female, man/woman.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:15 PM

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:15 PM

Allarharti plays it safe. He has no original thoughts. All of his shit is regurgitated based on what is politically and culturally safe to repeat.

ETA: Which is why he is getting destroyed here. He is sticking to a line he doesnt understand so he cant properly defend. Bitches about facts but when presented with real science dismisses it as not conclusive enough for him/her.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:17 PM

That study is called facts friend. I recall you seem to like facts but here you are arguing against facts. I think you just want to be right and have no interest in an honest discussion. Laugh all you want man if it makes you feel better that no one is agreeing with you.

1. Its not a fact until you link it and demonstrate a fact. Right now its known as anecdotal evidence.
"
Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes. Where only one or a few anecdotes are presented, there is a larger chance that they may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

You are telling me a story so far nothing you have presented proves your story.

Secondly, I'd assume the conclusion if conducted by legitimate scientists would not be presented as you presented it. It's bad logic to say because 1 boy had this result that all people have the same results.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:18 PM

But he did have a penis it was just removed and he never knew about that during the study. Come on man they teach this case in real schools. I know when you printed out your diploma from the University of Phoenix Online you rushed here to show everyone how smart you are but this is a well known case. It is at the crux of the nature/nurture issue and because of ethics regulations we likely wont get anything similar for awhile until all of these forced trans kids delaying puberty start offing themselves.

Link the case. I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just saying your account of it may not be accurate. Link the case

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:19 PM

Sorry you didnt attend a real school where they discussed the story of David Reimer (John/Joan)

ETA: Yes please let us know what you have discovered after running the information through your leftist filter.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:19 PM

Also Alarti,

From page 12:

I think you've been sticking to the gender-sex argument because that is more ambiguous and why I abandoned it, to clarify the issue at hand: male/female, man/woman.

Sex is for reproduction. Bathrooms are for pooping. The discussion was always about gender.. not sex... Unless, you want to change the topic to what sexual activity should be allowed in bathrooms?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:20 PM

Sorry you didnt attend a real school where they discussed the story of David Reimer (John/Joan)

I've heard lots of stories. I even heard a story once about some 800 year old guy who built a big boat and filled it with lots of animals !

I'm asking for science though. :)

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:23 PM

I've heard lots of stories. I even heard a story once about some 800 year old guy who built a big boat and filled it with lots of animals !

I'm asking for science though. :)

That is anecdotal until we get a link. We will take your word for it that you have heard lots of stories though.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:25 PM

That is anecdotal until we get a link. We will take your word for it that you have heard lots of stories though.

My assertion had no intention of proving a central point. It's obviously anecdotal.
I'm looking for the david reimar study though. So far I only see opinion articles.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:26 PM

My assertion had no intention of proving a central point. It's obviously anecdotal.
I'm looking for the david reimar study though. So far I only see opinion articles.

Not my fault bro. In real school we learned how to search for those things. Helps if you spell his name right.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:29 PM

Not my fault bro. In real school we learned how to search for those things. Helps if you spell his name right.

In real school you would have learned to prove your assertions. Yet you haven't, maybe you should use your super search powers and produce a link. It's starting to seem more likely there isn't one :)

As I supposed.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:30 PM

In real school you would have learned to prove your assertions. Yet you haven't, maybe you should use your super search powers and produce a link. It's starting to seem more likely there isn't one :)

As I supposed.

Can you prove that assertion?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:30 PM

Can you prove that assertion?

You can't prove a negative son. The burden of proof is on you. Can you prove unicorns aren't real?

Seriously though, I'd be very interested in reading this study. Since you are so good at searching take 3 minutes and find it. If you can, and it proves what you think it does, the sweet release of finally beating me in an argument for the first time should be worth the minimal effort.

Here is the part where you disappear from this thread for a few days... and later tell me that you answer all my questions. ROFL

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:32 PM

Sex is for reproduction. Bathrooms are for pooping. The discussion was always about gender.. not sex... Unless, you want to change the topic to what sexual activity should be allowed in bathrooms?

man
man/
noun
1.
an adult human male.
synonyms: male, adult male, gentleman; More

male
māl/
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.
"male children"
synonyms: masculine, virile, manly, macho; More

wom·an
ˈwo͝omən/
noun
an adult human female.
synonyms: lady, girl, female; More

fe·male
ˈfēˌmāl/
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
"a herd of female deer"

This is why a woman who assumes a male gender role is not male, nor a man and why a man who assumes a female gender role is not female or a woman. Understand how those 6 words work now?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:35 PM

I know its embarrassing to be refuted so easily on your own standard of evidence but the description in the dictionary must be taken in whole form. You don't get to cherry pick to support your premature conclusions.

The purpose of a dictionary is to DEFINE a word, you don't get to ignore pieces of the definition at your convenience.

typically used with reference to social or cultural differences rather than biological ones.

Gender: gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Sex: sex
seks/Submit
noun
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

In case you were wondering Reproduction is a biological function.

Sorry for your pride.

man
man/
noun
1.
an adult human male.
synonyms: male, adult male, gentleman; More

male
māl/
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.
"male children"
synonyms: masculine, virile, manly, macho; More

wom·an
ˈwo͝omən/
noun
an adult human female.
synonyms: lady, girl, female; More

fe·male
ˈfēˌmāl/
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
"a herd of female deer"

This is why a woman who assumes a male gender role is not male, nor a man and why a man who assumes a female gender role is not female or a woman. Understand how those 6 words work now?

We were defining sex and gender, not man or male.
Once again you can't cherry pick the definition to suit your purposes you must use the whole thing. Sorry kiddo. You're embarrassing yourself now.

Let me show you again:

sex
seks/Submit
noun
1.
(chiefly with reference to people) sexual activity, including specifically sexual intercourse.
"he enjoyed talking about sex"
synonyms: sexual intercourse, intercourse, lovemaking, making love, sex act, (sexual) relations; More
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.
"adults of both sexes"

gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).
"traditional concepts of gender"

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:36 PM

I should add that this is why terms like transman and transwoman are useful.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:36 PM

I should add that this is why terms like transman and transwoman are useful.

You should step back from your keyboard for a few minutes.. take a few deep breaths and attempt to think logically.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:37 PM

You can't prove a negative son. The burden of proof is on you. Can you prove unicorns aren't real?

Seriously though, I'd be very interested in reading this study. Since you are so good at searching take 3 minutes and find it. If you can, and it proves what you think it does, the sweet release of finally beating me in an argument for the first time should be worth the minimal effort.

Here is the part where you disappear from this thread for a few days... and later tell me that you answer all my questions. ROFL

The above is the internet equivalent of a man who sits when he pees. Not disappearing bro or ducking you. This is a famous case. It was part of the final in one of my classes. You dont want to present the evidence and we know why you are coping out with pretending you cant find out what I am talking about.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:39 PM

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:40 PM

The above is the internet equivalent of a man who sits when he pees. Not disappearing bro or ducking you. This is a famous case. It was part of the final in one of my classes. You dont want to present the evidence and we know why you are coping out with pretending you cant find out what I am talking about.

Santa don't hide. You said you know this case and are good at searching. Just post it. I would love to present the evidence I just can't find it. If you can please link it. I'd love to look at it.

Stop running away and lying. If you can't find the case I'll look harder just admit it.
Are you scared?

If the case really exists as a study and I didn't want to present the evidence than you should. I'm only find opinion articles. Can you find more?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 12:44 PM

Here is the part where you disappear from this thread for a few days... and later tell me that you answer all my questions. ROFL

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:47 PM

Dude is on the ropes now. Its obvious you found it and it destroys your argument or you would post it trying to be all smug and superior and rubbing my face in how wrong I am.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:48 PM

I detect Pokesan levels of snarkiness here. That you Pokes? ^^

Auvdar

07-08-2016, 12:49 PM

Dude is on the ropes now. Its obvious you found it and it destroys your argument or you would post it trying to be all smug and superior and rubbing my face in how wrong I am.

Or just do what someone in a real debate class would do and present the evidence to shut him down? You also look like an idiot the way you're handling "your side"..

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 12:53 PM

We were defining sex and gender, not man or male.
Once again you can't cherry pick the definition to suit your purposes you must use the whole thing. Sorry kiddo. You're embarrassing yourself now.

Let me show you again:

sex
seks/Submit
noun
1.
(chiefly with reference to people) sexual activity, including specifically sexual intercourse.
"he enjoyed talking about sex"
synonyms: sexual intercourse, intercourse, lovemaking, making love, sex act, (sexual) relations; More
2.
either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.
"adults of both sexes"

gen·der
ˈjendər/Submit
noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).
"traditional concepts of gender"

Also Alarti,

From page 12:

The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex. If you believe that you are a man when you do not posses a Y chromosome and do produce eggs, then you are delusional. If you believe that you are a woman when you have a y chromosome and produce sperm cells, then you are delusional. Separating and then confusing the terms gender and sex does not make it any more rational. You can be a masculine woman or a feminine man and choose to live as you perceive one or the other, but to believe you actually are is delusion.

I think you've been sticking to the gender-sex argument because that is more ambiguous and why I abandoned it, to clarify the issue at hand: male/female, man/woman.

man
man/
noun
1.
an adult human male.
synonyms: male, adult male, gentleman; More

male
māl/
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.
"male children"
synonyms: masculine, virile, manly, macho; More

wom·an
ˈwo͝omən/
noun
an adult human female.
synonyms: lady, girl, female; More

fe·male
ˈfēˌmāl/
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
"a herd of female deer"

This is why a woman who assumes a male gender role is not male, nor a man and why a man who assumes a female gender role is not female or a woman. Understand how those 6 words work now?

Reposting and calling you names because that wins debates.

Buffoon!

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 12:56 PM

Auvdar

07-08-2016, 01:03 PM

It doesnt matter what happens you just dont get Allaharti apparently. I could post the study and he would then go dig up some refutation online because he isnt very original or he will change the topic. Out "sourcing" each other and all that bullshit is why internet debates fail. If you were in a real debate there would be judges and rules none of which are present here and you would have to formulate your own argument not something you can look up online.

Besides Im a cartoon. Allarharti is the real idiot because thats actually him and he actually believes what he says here.

ETA: Im not debating something esoteric here. Google the case yourself (David Remier-Joan/John-Dr. Money)and you will see what game Allaharti is playing here.

I've been around long enough to understand him. Point is, if you're going to put your entire point on some evidence.. then show the evidence. He can then refute it or work around it all he wants. Otherwise all this is is a "I'm right!" .. "Nu-uh I'M RIGHT!!".. and then someone goes on google dictionary to copy/paste something..

I'm going to be honest, it really sounds like no one has any real evidence to show. Both sides are ducking the issue. Making up lame excuses "Oh it's an internet debate so there is no point la la la".

Yet, you continue to go back and forth desperately trying to show how the other side is wrong.

edit: But you are debating. You are still going back and forth with him. You say you will not debate it, but you are still debating it with him.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:04 PM

or you could google it your fucking self......

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:10 PM

edit: But you are debating. You are still going back and forth with him. You say you will not debate it, but you are still debating it with him.

I will debate it but I shouldnt have to invest much time in this debate when the information is so readily available. I didnt see him post anything at all to support his claims about shit in Thailand. He just said it and here we are having a debate about a well known easily searchable case that is taught to this day in major universities.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 01:10 PM

I've been around long enough to understand him. Point is, if you're going to put your entire point on some evidence.. then show the evidence. He can then refute it or work around it all he wants. Otherwise all this is is a "I'm right!" .. "Nu-uh I'M RIGHT!!".. and then someone goes on google dictionary to copy/paste something..

I'm going to be honest, it really sounds like no one has any real evidence to show. Both sides are ducking the issue. Making up lame excuses "Oh it's an internet debate so there is no point la la la".

Yet, you continue to go back and forth desperately trying to show how the other side is wrong.

edit: But you are debating. You are still going back and forth with him. You say you will not debate it, but you are still debating it with him.

Are you his room mate?

Raev

07-08-2016, 01:12 PM

god you people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

Reimer said that Dr. Money forced the twins to rehearse sexual acts involving "thrusting movements", with David playing the bottom role. Reimer said that, as a child, he had to get "down on all fours" with his brother, Brian Reimer, "up behind his butt" with "his crotch against" his "buttocks". Reimer said that Dr. Money forced David, in another sexual position, to have his "legs spread" with Brian on top. Reimer said that Dr. Money also forced the children to take their "clothes off" and engage in "genital inspections". On at "least one occasion", Reimer said that Dr. Money took a photograph of the two children doing these activities. Dr. Money's rationale for these various treatments was his belief that "childhood 'sexual rehearsal play'" was important for a "healthy adult gender identity".

Auvdar

07-08-2016, 01:12 PM

or you could google it your fucking self......

So you make the other side look up the evidence themselves instead of presenting it? Yeah, you're a real good debater! What's the "real school" you go to? Charter College? Some 2 month online degree?

For the record, I know the case. I'm just commenting on your lack of debate skills. And don't even try to tell me you weren't debating with him. You were.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:17 PM

So you make the other side look up the evidence themselves instead of presenting it? Yeah, you're a real good debater! What's the "real school" you go to? Charter College? Some 2 month online degree?

For the record, I know the case. I'm just commenting on your lack of debate skills. And don't even try to tell me you weren't debating with him. You were.

So you know about the case but wanted to engage in BS like Allaharti? Yeah im real serious bro got me a timer and score cards and everything.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:18 PM

god you people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

Haha ty Raev. Allaharti has yet to be able to find any information about this.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:20 PM

The case is terrible and shows the lengths that people went to to prove their view of malleable gender. It was bad science but much can be drawn from it. Like I said we wont get anything like that again until this new batch starts offing themselves.

Archalen

07-08-2016, 01:21 PM

I'm familiar with the case. It only shows that someone who "identifies" as a male wants that identity to be realized and will become suicidal if people tell him to act a different way. Any other conclusions drawn are unscientific and fallacious.

Edit: not even the above is "proved" by the study, but it's a plausible conclusion. There may be other conclusions that fit the data. It's one case so if you are familiar with the sciences you won't use it to try and draw conclusions. Rather use it as a hypothesis generating case-study because of its limited "n" and scope.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:21 PM

Reposting and calling you names because that wins debates.

Buffoon!

The debate is already won. The names are just for my personal satisfaction they have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:22 PM

Haha ty Raev. Allaharti has yet to be able to find any information about this.

No I said I found opinion pieces not scientific studies... which you claimed was your evidence. I was very clear on this.

Again, I'm not saying the study doesn't exist only that I can't find it... and it seems you can't either.

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=518304

This is the closest thing I could find and its just a abstract in front of a pay wall.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:23 PM

I'm familiar with the case. It only shows that someone who "identifies" as a male wants that identity to be realized and will become suicidal if people tell him to act a different way. Any other conclusions drawn are unscientific and fallacious.

The only thing it shows is that Allaharti's claim that gender is learned behavior based on culture is wrong.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:24 PM

No I said I found opinion pieces not scientific studies... which you claimed was your evidence. I was very clear on this.

Wiggling are we? Other people here have already stated they are familiar with the case. Nice spin though.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 01:25 PM

The debate is already won. The names are just for my personal satisfaction they have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

I was mistaken then, thank you ^^

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:26 PM

Wiggling are we? Other people here have already stated they are familiar with the case. Nice spin though.

I'm familiar with the story of Noah. It's anecdotal. Because there is a story of Noah doesn't mean its true. Familiarity has nothing to do with anything I never said the case doesn't exist. I just want to see the science. Can you find it... otherwise I have to attribute your words as personal opinion and not fact.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:27 PM

You are so intellectually dishonest. Im glad you walked into this trap as predicted.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:27 PM

I was mistaken then, thank you ^^

Yes you often seem to be. I accept your humble defeat. I do hope the trouncing I gave you doesn't discourage you from trying to engage in meaningful debate in the future. Better logic next time :)

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 01:29 PM

The only thing it shows is that Allaharti's claim that gender is learned behavior based on culture is wrong.

Well, it doesn't actually prove his assertion wrong, just doesn't support it. It really is incumbent upon him to substantiate his assertion that gender is a learned behavior. Did he even make that assertion though? I'd not be surprised, but I do not recall him actually saying that.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:29 PM

So you make the other side look up the evidence themselves instead of presenting it? Yeah, you're a real good debater! What's the "real school" you go to? Charter College? Some 2 month online degree?

For the record, I know the case. I'm just commenting on your lack of debate skills. And don't even try to tell me you weren't debating with him. You were.

You are so intellectually dishonest. Im glad you walked into this trap as predicted.

mmmhmmm.... What trap would that be... the one where you expose yourself us unable to find the scientific study to support your claim? I kind of expected this though.

Archalen

07-08-2016, 01:30 PM

I'm familiar with the story of Noah. It's anecdotal. Because there is a story of Noah doesn't mean its true. Familiarity has nothing to do with anything I never said the case doesn't exist. I just want to see the science. Can you find it... otherwise I have to attribute your words as personal opinion and not fact.

It's far from a scientific experiment, was controlled in a very limited way, and wasn't designed sufficiently to prove anything. It's just a thing that happened with limited controls that can be looked at retroactively as a hypothesis generating case study.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 01:30 PM

Yes you often seem to be. I accept your humble defeat. I do hope the trouncing I gave you doesn't discourage you from trying to engage in meaningful debate in the future. Better logic next time :)

Lol ^^

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 01:30 PM

This varies based on culture. In thailand for example gender is very fluid. What a man or woman is "supposed" to feel/behave is defined by the culture and upbringing that surrounds you.

/yawn

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:31 PM

Well, it doesn't actually prove his assertion wrong, just doesn't support it. It really is incumbent upon him to substantiate his assertion that gender is a learned behavior. Did he even make that assertion though? I'd not be surprised, but I do not recall him actually saying that.

I didn't I said gender is in the mind and what we call gender is based on cultural or social norms. What may be feminine in one culture wouldnt in another.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:31 PM

/yawn

I didn't I said gender is in the mind and what we call gender is based on cultural or social norms. What may be feminine in one culture wouldn't in another.

/yawn This is about the definition of what gender is not the catalyst of gender.. Simpleton

Hook up that scientific study bro!

Archalen

07-08-2016, 01:34 PM

Personally I don't care whether it's nature or nurture and am not convinced that's a sufficiently nuanced framing of the debate (genes can be activated or deactivated in a way by lifestyle factors so in that case there's a biological component and an environmental component).

Auvdar

07-08-2016, 01:34 PM

I didn't I said gender is in the mind and what we call gender is based on cultural or social norms. What may be feminine in one culture wouldnt in another.

From what I can get from this thread, the issue is coming from what people define as "gender". Two points of view. One is "Man = Penis. Women = vagina. Hermaphrodite = gross". The other is the more mental view on gender, how your brain associates yourself.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:37 PM

From what I can get from this thread, the issue is coming from what people define as "gender". Two points of view. One is "Man = Penis. Women = vagina. Hermaphrodite = gross". The other is the more mental view on gender, how your brain associates yourself.

Considering that self identity is largely unique to humans in a full sense, scholars long ago evolved the definition away from organ based identity. People who still define gender based on sex organs typically have a low understanding of science. We know sooo much more about biology, psychology etc to have these people still be stuck in the dark ages.

Sex isn't even defined by the penis and vagina anymore its about the gametes.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 01:43 PM

From what I can get from this thread, the issue is coming from what people define as "gender". Two points of view. One is "Man = Penis. Women = vagina. Hermaphrodite = gross". The other is the more mental view on gender, how your brain associates yourself.

No, I've been debating that men are not and cannot become women and women are not and cannot become men, whether they assume opposite gender roles or not. Alarti attempted to define the debate as sex vs gender, because what I said was true. Take a look at my arguments and the definitions. My issue is with the promotion of delusion that obstructs happiness.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 01:48 PM

Considering that self identity is largely unique to humans in a full sense, scholars long ago evolved the definition away from organ based identity. People who still define gender based on sex organs typically have a low understanding of science. We know sooo much more about biology, psychology etc to have these people still be stuck in the dark ages.

Sex isn't even defined by the penis and vagina anymore its about the gametes.

One last time with fingers crossed.

Assuming a male gender role does not make one male because male is a biological term. Get it?

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:49 PM

No, I've been debating that men are not and cannot become women and women are not and cannot become men, whether they assume opposite gender roles or not. Alarti attempted to define the debate as sex vs gender, because what I said was true. Take a look at my arguments and the definitions. My issue is with the promotion of delusion that obstructs happiness.

The entire gender identity debate is based on Gender

Either way. A man can not become a woman, okay. My argument is that What you might consider a man becoming a woman.. was always a woman. Your classification is just incorrect.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 01:50 PM

One last time with fingers crossed.

Assuming a male gender role does not make one male because male is a biological term. Get it?

Male isn't a gender role. Male is a sex role. You keep making the same mistake.

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 02:00 PM

Male isn't a gender role. Male is a sex role. You keep making the same mistake.

Exactly ^^ And man is defined as an adult human male, so a woman becoming a man ... was not and could not have always been a man.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 02:43 PM

Exactly ^^ And man is defined as an adult human male, so a woman becoming a man ... was not and could not have always been a man.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man

Gender
Biological factors are not sufficient determinants of whether a person considers themselves a man or is considered a man.

pickled_heretic

07-08-2016, 02:44 PM

there's some serious doublethink big brother sophistry shit going on when it comes to trannies and their self labeling

maskedmelon

07-08-2016, 03:03 PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man

Gender
Biological factors are not sufficient determinants of whether a person considers themselves a man or is considered a man.

Perception clouds a lot of things, perception isn't truth though.

Also, interesting that the fellow who originated this schism in gender/sex is the same Dr. Money referenced earlier in the David Remier case.

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 04:22 PM

You are so intellectually dishonest. Im glad you walked into this trap as predicted.

Also, interesting that the fellow who originated this schism in gender/sex is the same Dr. Money referenced earlier in the David Remier case.

That's perception on outside forces not your inner self. Obvious

Alarti0001

07-08-2016, 11:23 PM

mmmhmmm.... What trap would that be... the one where you expose yourself us unable to find the scientific study to support your claim? I kind of expected this though.

Nihilist_santa

07-08-2016, 11:57 PM

Are you autistic?

Alarti0001

07-09-2016, 09:49 AM

Are you autistic?

Waiting on that study broheim. :D

khanable

07-09-2016, 10:10 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg0D1PpgCXs

maskedmelon

07-09-2016, 11:35 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg0D1PpgCXs

lol

big_ole_jpn

07-09-2016, 04:10 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg0D1PpgCXs

good lank

AzzarTheGod

07-09-2016, 05:38 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg0D1PpgCXs

post of the day. this hits house.

AzzarTheGod

07-09-2016, 06:04 PM

Haha ty Raev. Allaharti has yet to be able to find any information about this.

Theme song I heard in my head when the dunks hit on Allahrti in this thread when the Wikipedia page dropped. Heavy.

The SKS with the bayonet oh wow. The G36 (symbolically the David Reimer case in this instance) melted Allahrti's brain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ3TKKMCr1g

big_ole_jpn

07-09-2016, 06:06 PM

stack brick like stonehenge, nice

bars

Alarti0001

07-10-2016, 01:07 PM

Daily bump until santa answers my question.... (which he says he always answers)

AzzarTheGod

07-10-2016, 03:57 PM

Daily bump until santa answers my question.... (which he says he always answers)

Pretty sure you got bumped when bricks were stacked like Stonehenge on your head in this thread.

Alarti0001

07-11-2016, 10:32 AM

Pretty sure you got bumped when bricks were stacked like Stonehenge on your head in this thread.

Alternate reality fan fiction?

Alarti0001

07-12-2016, 12:03 PM

Daily bump until santa answers my question.... (which he says he always answers)

Nihilist_santa

07-12-2016, 01:25 PM

Daily autist reminder dude is still waiting for Wapner.

Alarti0001

07-12-2016, 03:07 PM

Daily autist reminder dude is still waiting for Wapner.

Still scared to answer a question. Figured as much. Cucked

Nihilist_santa

07-12-2016, 05:38 PM

Still scared to answer a question. Figured as much. Cucked

http://i.imgur.com/6EsBO1K.gif

Nihilist_santa

07-13-2016, 09:29 AM

Daily reminder.

http://i.imgur.com/EOZuoqH.jpg

maskedmelon

07-13-2016, 11:34 AM

Nihilist_santa

07-13-2016, 12:59 PM

I'm lost now. This could be the start of a new discussion though. What relevance does Stonehenge have to either of the questions of "Dos the Left Hate Pride?" or the tangential discussion of "Is gender socially contrived?"

Im sure its connected somehow. A perfect example of the left hating pride occurred today when German authorities conducted raids on neo-nazis, holocaust deniers, and other far right patriots over internet "hate speech". Apparently you can only be proud if you sport rape women and are from a 3rd world hell hole.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36782874

Alarti0001

07-14-2016, 02:24 PM

Santa ever going to answer a question.... or are you willing to admit you aren't capable?

Nihilist_santa

07-14-2016, 05:42 PM

Sorry you are the only person in the thread unable to find the information you seek. The Kinsey Institute has a large collection of his writings and notes. Perhaps you should read one of his old published textbooks? Failing that I think a tall glass of bleach would be the next step.

http://i.imgur.com/eUN4YhJ.gif

Alarti0001

07-18-2016, 06:35 PM

Nihilist_santa

07-18-2016, 06:55 PM

That's not true. Guess You can't prove it. Honestly though, I never thought you could.

Prove your assertion friend.

Lurikeen

07-18-2016, 08:04 PM

AzzarTheGod

07-18-2016, 08:05 PM

Daily reminder.

http://i.imgur.com/EOZuoqH.jpg

maskedmelon

07-18-2016, 08:19 PM

I still don't get it.

I hate you guys. >.>

Alarti0001

07-19-2016, 10:06 AM

Prove your assertion friend.

Can't prove a negative. Basic logic. Can prove you won't answer questions with evidence though and did!. Dumbass

Nihilist_santa

07-19-2016, 12:11 PM

Can't prove a negative. Basic logic. Can prove you won't answer questions with evidence though and did!. Dumbass

I gave you several places where you can find the information. Your response that it isnt true is bullshit man. Sorry that the only research you have ever done involved wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricklayer

Alarti0001

07-20-2016, 12:42 PM

I gave you several places where you can find the information. Your response that it isnt true is bullshit man. Sorry that the only research you have ever done involved wikipedia.

You linked opinion pieces.. Not in the slightest bit surprised you don't understand the difference between opinion and science :)

Link the science.. you didn't. At this point I wonder if you are really this stupid or if this is more willful ignorance. Hoping the latter.. assuming the former.

Nihilist_santa

07-20-2016, 02:01 PM

You linked opinion pieces.. Not in the slightest bit surprised you don't understand the difference between opinion and science :)

Link the science.. you didn't. At this point I wonder if you are really this stupid or if this is more willful ignorance. Hoping the latter.. assuming the former.

They are not opinion pieces they are his notes and textbooks that he wrote. Try a better school next time friend. I was able to learn about this very factual incident in school as well as several other thread participants. You just seem incredibly out of touch at this point. You cant see the forest for the trees or perhaps all these bricks are blocking your view.

Alarti0001

07-21-2016, 01:04 PM

They are not opinion pieces they are his notes and textbooks that he wrote. Try a better school next time friend. I was able to learn about this very factual incident in school as well as several other thread participants. You just seem incredibly out of touch at this point. You cant see the forest for the trees or perhaps all these bricks are blocking your view.

The only fact you have is someone wrote about it. Doesn't mean its a fact. Still awaiting to hear your response about countries invading the USA......... waiting.......

Alarti0001

07-21-2016, 01:06 PM

Nihilist_santa

07-21-2016, 01:26 PM

This is the phone number for the Kinsey Institute (812) 855-7686. You need to ask to speak to the Librarian about the John Money collection. He will show you where the available online information is and then will inform you that due to confidentiality agreements with his patients that some of the information will not be digitized and you will have to come see them in person or will have to read one of his textbooks.

Alarti0001

07-21-2016, 01:27 PM

Nihilist_santa

07-21-2016, 01:36 PM

Please provide evidence... as is your responsibility if you want your claim to be taken seriously. Thanks. Come again when you have done so.

There is no disputing my claim friend. The information is indeed real and factual as attested to by others in the thread, the existence of the John Money collection, The Kinsey Institute, Johns Hopkins Med School, The University of Indiana, and the prevalence of this being taught in university. Fuck off because no one fell for your semantic bullshit and you just seem incompetent at this point.

Alarti0001

07-21-2016, 01:47 PM

There is no disputing my claim friend. The information is indeed real and factual as attested to by others in the thread, the existence of the John Money collection, The Kinsey Institute, Johns Hopkins Med School, The University of Indiana, and the prevalence of this being taught in university. Fuck off because no one fell for your semantic bullshit and you just seem incompetent at this point.

Still waiting. The Mormon church exists and receives money even had education religion is even taught in school yet none of this proves god exists.

If the science is easy to find... as you claim... Find it and post it. Seems you can't though and are trying to wiggle your way out of this (It's not working)> No one is falling for your bullshit and you just seem incompetent at this point (really at all points).

ITT: Put up or Shut up pussy