- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,386
- Reaction score
- 0
You're silly enough to call that thing a woman.
Good rebuttal. Your reasoning skills are impeccable.
You're silly enough to call that thing a woman.
Good rebuttal. Your reasoning skills are impeccable.
It's not a debate, I'm just stating a fact, that Bruce Jenner is a freak.
You guys nailed it.
Better understanding your sexuality or, more accurately, having your sexual identity more physically represented, doesn't enhance your understanding of all issues. She is still allowed to be a dummy about public services and the poor.
Well.....yeah. Would the NRA be super silly to not want to be represented by a gun owner who wishes for higher restrictions on firearm variety and access to gun purchase?
Do you understand what an activist group aims to do?
Hint: roots of word is "activism"
Correct. That applies to all activist groups (the NRA, Family Research Council, etc.--all of them) and for obvious reasons.
You should probably read the OP or the link for more.
"Now I'm worried. Caitlyn has every right to be just as conservative as she chooses, but many transgender men and women need social programs to survive and that's nothing to be ashamed of," Boylan says. "Living in the bubble is an impediment to understanding other people. If Cait's going to be a spokesperson for our community, this is something she's going to have to understand."
Is there anything to be ashamed of these days? Flunking out of school, chronic unemployment, being homeless? Let me guess, those are all just things that happen, because the system isn't offering the support you need to succeed?
Shame can be a good thing, and an intense motivating factor.
I believe in a physical person having the authority to do what they please with their physical body or their identity..
But it seems that their disagreement is with social programs and whether or not they are always a good thing or a crutch. Or thats what seemed to be his point. So it s not transgender issues they are discussing really. So its great to be a transgender famous person who we can use to promote our sick agenda, but only so long as you are a screaming liberal. As soon a you display any non liberal behavior were gonna have to have a "talk". Thats whats going on here, lets be real.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...vative-politics-rise-to-the-fore-on-i-am-cait
He is free to be whoever he wants...as long as he is exactly what we want him to be.
Apparently, he also said he doesn't support Obama, and has always been "more conservative". I can't wait for Trump to tap him for VP. Liberals heads will explode.
Right. People can butcher themselves and pretend to be whatever they want. But the thought that "we" should be forced to recognize this is insanity.
We kicked that white girl pretending to be black at NAACP to the curb. This is the same shit.
Chopping your dick off does not make you a woman. Getting a tan and curling your hair does not make you an african-northernamerican. Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.
An Elivs impersonator can pretend to be the king but that does not entitle him to check out Priscilla Presley's beaver.
The two posts you quoted went right over your head: let's be real.
Also, I like how favoring funding for demonstrably important public programs and being made uncomfortable by the insinuation that the beneficiaries (for whom your organization advocates) of those programs are lazy dependents is your definitions of liberal hysterics.
If an African American organization were to wish their representatives to be supportive of important political measures that they have researched to be beneficial to the black community, is that liberal brainwash, or is that being a functional fucking organization that understands its purpose?
Do you see where your argument begins to eat itself?
Translation:
Nothing went over my head. You are a condescending little bastard arent you.
Correct me if im wrong but he never said that program recipients were lazy dependents. He merely made the point that sometimes people can get comfortable not working and getting govt assistance. That sometimes it can seem like one would be better off staying on said programs rather than get a job. Very true statements dont you think ?
Their reaction to that is to become nervous and feel like they have to question whether or not he will be a good spokesperson. THAT is liberal hysterics. And Im still confused why welfare is a trans issue ? maybe im ignorant on the subject, but why is it a more important issue for them than anyone else ?
Here's where you lose me. Who is coming to your house and forcing you to call Jenner a woman?
This is going to bother me because now I'm going to recognize you as that guy who thinks he beat me like we were having an intense political debate and not just me commenting on a Kardashian freakshow
But it seems that their disagreement is with social programs and whether or not they are always a good thing or a crutch. Or thats what seemed to be his point. So it s not transgender issues they are discussing really. So its great to be a transgender famous person who we can use to promote our sick agenda, but only so long as you are a screaming liberal. As soon a you display any non liberal behavior were gonna have to have a "talk". Thats whats going on here, lets be real.
Good rebuttal. Your reasoning skills are impeccable.
Oh, no doubt we are not forced to. What about the planet fitness woman who did not want some pervy guy who thought he was a woman in the dressing room.
Or say a guy who got a sex change fighting women in mma.
Or instagram not allowing jenner talk.
Or the outlash of social media persecutors if you say he has not had the struggles that women go through like a famous feminist did---who was immediately attacked for it.
So I am sorry I lost you at the part where you thought that the whole world revolves around what is allowed on this message board. If had known this about you, I would have brought you a stair walking helmet.
I don't really get the whole call Jenner a "she/her" on the internet.
If I met Jenner, out of respect I'd call him Cait or whatever, and I'd use the pronouns that he wants me to, but when having a discussion on the internet, I don't really see the need to call Jenner a woman.
I'm not particular on that either, unless the pronoun is being politicized.
If someone wishes to call the person a shampoo bottle, I wouldn't much mind. But getting angry at what other people call them (and then parlaying that into some kind of self-pitying victimization) is just....well, sad.
It's not a debate, I'm just stating a fact, that Bruce Jenner is a freak.