@hydroacetylene's banner p

hydroacetylene


				

				

				
8 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 04 20:00:27 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 128

hydroacetylene


				
				
				

				
8 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 04 20:00:27 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 128

Verified Email

The Greek-Catholic belt in Eastern Europe, Georgia the country, and the American red tribe have TFR’s ~2. It’s achievable even if I couldn’t really point to the unifying factors- western social conservatism, religiosity, and ruralness, I suppose.

Men in a dress and a wig? Yes.

I mean, the solution for this poor unfortunate is to work through whatever issues drive interest in transgenderism rather than transitioning. Make your bed and now lie it, I suppose- using the men’s locker room is a risk for some biologically male transgenders, but society oughtn’t to be in the business of protecting individuals from the consequences of their own bad decisions at the expense of people who haven’t made such bad decisions.

I mean, trying to pull permits for a literal rocket launch would do they anyways.

This is the purpose of government under liberalism. You can totally have ‘different people live under different laws and there’s complex rules about who defers to whom’, and have a state, as long as it’s not a liberal society.

I don’t think trans realize that.

And this is specifically autistic, though. Your plumber dissatisfied with his love life hits the strip club instead.

I have empathy for those suffering from mental illness(like those who can’t tell what gender they are), but that doesn’t mean I go along with their delusions. Some things are just false. 2+2=5 men can get pregnant there’s more than two genders etc.

I don't think it's because conservatives suddenly discovered they exist.

I agree with the general thrust of your argument- there were transgenders in the ‘90’s and while it wasn’t acceptable among cultural conservatives nobody cared that much- but trans issues got big all of a sudden partly because Chris Rufo was able to magnify some high profile cases of trans making progressives look bad and republicans won a governors race in a blue state out of it.

legal processes to change their legal gender. They kill themselves at elevated rates when forced to conform to their biological gender. This is not just some kink.

They also kill themselves at elevated rates after transition.

Like, ‘it’s entirely a kink’ is legitimately a bad argument, but it doesn’t mean transgenderism is valid. We can just… not accommodate crazy delusional people.

My grandfather, back during segregation, conspicuously used the colored bathroom many a time. Nothing was ever done because no one gave a shit(it, uh, might have been different the other direction, but a wage slave at a store has Better Things To Do than get in a confrontation with a customer so lots of them presumably got away with that too- I think some of the segregation cases involved blacks who got away with using the white section over and over again before anyone called them on it).

Of course the real benefit to these laws from a red state perspective is it makes it impossible for blue cities to force bathrooms to be gender neutral.

Musk and Rogan have legitimately embraced some conservative views, even if mostly on the libertarian end.

‘Protect women’ is not actually a historical norm, and societies which are not western today often have no problems harming women.

Nude swimming disappeared because swimsuit technology improved; communal showers i’m pretty sure went out of style due to increasing wealth making individual stalls more affordable.

You can’t.

‘Transgender is a real thing and not a mental illness’ and ‘transgender is some kind of delusion or mental disorder’ are both unfalsifiable because they come down to object level postulates in definitions. You would win the argument by convincing someone that your postulates are better than theirs, the same as they would convince you.

Musk is an eccentric right winger in todays spectrum.

I think a few of them have been revealed to be EMTALA violations on the part of the hospital but I’m not sure.

If the question was changed to "would you rather meet a boy [as in, non-adult male human] or a bear in the woods" the answers change, because boys are by definition not capable of being a physical -> sexual threat.

Depends on where you draw the man/boy line honestly. There’s lots of women who would call most teenaged boys who would not find it a physical challenge to subdue and rape them ‘boys’, and a smaller but still substantial number who would call most college aged men boys.

They’re from a generation where it was more normal.

Why is this such an issue? Restrooms have stalls. I couldn't tell what gender was in one if I tried.

Because it is an issue. Normie not-very socially conservative women really care about there not being biological men in their or their daughters spaces of partial undress.

Is 98% of the same outcome not a solution? It’s a solution that comes down hard on one side, but a solution nonetheless.

Uh, normie Twitter is very much a thing. Sports and pop culture and local news that isn’t about politics is pretty easy to come by.

Don't forget that Ms Thurman also declined to seek medical care for her adverse event; this surely raises the odds of abortion pills doing very bad things.

Vance is probably more Roe v Wade than Griggs. Trump has a muddled middle view on abortion, RFK and Musk are pro-choice at least in theory. Musk is the main one I'd point to being anti-Griggs. The powerful governors are almost universally anti-Roe and more-or-less pro-Griggs.

While your red tribe normie doesn't particularly trust IQ tests, to the extent that he's aware of griggs he's probably not in favor on the basis that it's an excessive labor market regulation/affirmative action/the meat of the issue is adequately covered by existing antidiscrimination law.

I would’ve guessed Russia or the Ottoman Empire was fairly likely to do mass killings of Jews in 1900 and that Jews living in the pale of settlement would be at risk due to a continental war between Russia and Germany, which is predicting that Jewish genocide might be a thing. I wouldn’t have guessed ‘camps run by Germany’ but it’s kind of irrelevant whether totenkopf or Cossack does the mass murder; the point is ‘Jews in Eastern Europe having near to mid term future genocide risk’ was foreseeable at the time.

On the contrary, there is not a major jewish population with a foreseeable near or mid future genocide risk today(you can, I’m sure, name one that not-delusionally-histrionic-about-antisemitism people can agree is in danger or genocide or ethnic cleansing if you disagree).