Is there a name for LGBT people and multicultists? I think they're part of the same general movement, but I don't know of a name to highlight the fact that they're the same problem.
I do believe they're steering societies in the wrong direction. They falsely believe that their "progress" makes things better, when in reality, we're just living off the leftovers from much more conservative times. There is no support for this way of life, we're simply walking farther and farther off our pillars, and at some point, whatever we're walking on will break.
I will personally remain civil during this thread. I welcome opposition as long as you have ideas and arguments and don't attack me personally, as I won't attack you personally. This thread is about ideas and a person having different ideas shouldn't be hated for it, at least not in this thread.
If you're up for it, so am I.
"Leftists" as classified by Theodore Kaczynski. It also spans more than just these, but they are definitely part of it. Read his manifesto here: http://editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf
Don't be afraid of the text. It's concise and beautiful. He has a rather interesting history too.
I might send him a Christmas letter to his jail cell this year.
>Overall crime is going down
Because everyone who is even remotely suspicious just gets locked away. Look at US American prisons.
>we're technologically booming
Is that always a good thing?
>you're allowed to express your opinion
As long as it isn't against the popular belief.
>Overall crime is going down,
This isn't true. Violent crimes are going up. That means crimes where someone is attacked. I'm not nearly as concerned for stuff where nobody gets hurt physically or mentally, but aggression is something I'm very concerned about.
I'm not allowed my expression. Are you insane? Speaking my mind on most subjects would mean social death several times over and you know it.
I can't even share basic scientific facts without everyone looking at me like maybe I'm a neonazi.
Yes, it's always a good thing. And no, you don't go to jail or even get lynched/have vigilantes coming to physically hurt you for your opinion. And are you saying there's no more due process at all and people are just being thrown in jail for nothing? Yeah, that happens.. but that's not the reason crime is down.
I think the police and politicians definitely need to be put in check, but this minority group that no one takes seriously has a negligible effect on anything let alone to the extent that they're "ruining society". FFS, just get a good pair of headphones.
I can agree that saying biological sex and gender are mutually exclusive doesn't make sense considering our genetic makeup composes who we are. But given the fact that people of the same sex display a wide range of characteristics I think it is fair to say wanting to change your gender to match that of the stereotypes associated with the opposite sex and being willing to change your genitalia to make that happen isn't necessarily abnormal, just irregular. Given that there are plenty of highly intelligent and respectable transsexuals labeling them insane is outright stupid.
Sure you can, you're on /b/. You have an outlet for these ideas, there's no reason to attach your name to them.
>How are they ruining society?
In many, many ways. Mainly, though, by individualising societies, making individuals weaker and weaker, undermining their sense of community wherever there is a sense of community (family, nation, race, religion). There's a pattern and a reason as to why the same things are attacked all the time and presented as backwards, unhip, retarded, etc.
It's to make you weak, a sitting duck. And it works.
These people want mass immigration so big corporations can lower salaries for all; they defend themselves by accusing anyone who resists this of being a racist. Plainly, this means that anyone who is a real socialist and want to protect the working class will have to be branded a Nazi by the opposition, who will pretend to care for immigrants and foreigners while in reality they're just serving big corporations.
it's vicious as fuck and "these people" swallowed the whole thing without complaining.
We can accomplish more work with less effort, therefore we can survive harsher conditions and in general have more freedoms (freedoms gained through ability rather than the "not having anyone imprison you" freedoms).
>US violent crime
May I ask you why you think your 300 million people count more than the 6.7 billion of us? Just because I learned your language well enough to communicate with you doesn't mean you should feel entitled to assume I'm American. I'm not.
This may be true of America, but it isn't of Europe. You don't have mass immigration in America. You're extremely tight with immigration. In fact, what you do, if someone proposed it in Europe, they'd get called a fascist.
If you're from Romania, you can't even set foot in America. Plain simple. If France suggested doing this, they'd get flamed like hell.
That said, you can't honestly compare /b/ to normal offline life, as /b/ exists BECAUSE you can't say this stuff out there. Don't even try to convince me that this isn't true.
Paul exists because you can't socially discuss this shit without having a secret handshake and some catacombs to discuss in.
I'm not going to say corporations are people, but they're run by people. And this isn't the people OP is talking about, he's talking about people who want to make this gender shit an issue.
How you reached a conclusion that these people = the majority of people who are pro-immigration I have no idea. Absolutely zero, it sounds like some shit you pulled out of your ass. I'm pro-imigration and I think sex = gender.
>We can accomplish more work with less effort
This also leaves us with plenty of free time. Time to think and question everything.
Psychological illnesses have increased dramatically throughout the last 100 years. Many people have no motivation and feel like depressed, useless sacks of shit regularly.
It can also be used to accomplish more bad things with less effort. We are damaging our natural environment at a killing pace.
If our increased productivity was somehow linked to a common goal and people could feel a sense of accomplishment when they close in on the goal, then I guess I wouldn't have that much of a problem with our current way of life.
>I'm not going to say corporations are people, but they're run by people. And this isn't the people OP is talking about, he's talking about people who want to make this gender shit an issue.
I'm OP, these people are the exact same people. Everyone in LGBT and the rest are pro mass immigration. It's part of the package.
Just ask them. Not wanting your country raped by millions of foreigners is "racism".
>this is an American issue
I opened the thread, don't tell me what my own thread is really about.
Whatever bullshit you make up, it comes to us.
I've seen French comics explaining "rape culture" and "friendzone" concepts to French audiences.
I'm angry as hell thinking I'm now going to hear retarded libtard shit from everyone in France and beyond.
Man, you sound like bill o'reilly. I watched this interview with him about how he was absolutely right that drugs ruined detroit. He was completely right.
Then he goes on to say, to fix this problem there should be school uniforms and prayer in school and shit. That's like you, you point out the correct problems but have 0 understanding of their causes. I really am out.
But trans people are mentally sick degenerates, don't you see? They are so profoundly confused that they don't even believe the truth of their nature. They are born with dicks and want to be women (or vice versa), how could you deny their sickness?
They are symptomatic of a post-industrial society of confusion and psychological suffering.
Whoever made that photo was misinformed.
"Transsexual" and "Transgender" are not meant to be interchangeable. A Transsexual is a person who suffers from GID, a medical disorder that makes the person feel as though they were born in the opposite. Transsexualism is strictly gender binary, and only Transsexuals are candidates for SRS surgery.
"Transgender" is a blanket term for anyone that believes their gender and sex do not match. This includes all non-binary denominations and genderfluids. Transsexualism by definition is a subset of Transgenderism, but not all people who are transgender are transsexuals.
Tl;Dr: Transsexualism is a recognized medical disorder, "Trangendered" is a piggyback term to make sure special snowflakes have their own words too.
Transsexualism is when you change sex. It's based on facts, the fact that you got operated.
Everything else comes straight from Tumblr and has no value.
Gender isn't real, I hope you're aware of that.
"Transsexualism" is the reason you get the surgery, not just what you call a person who has had the surgery.
>Gender isn't real, I hope you're aware of that.
The Journal of Psychiatric Research says otherwise.
Listen, transsexualism is the act of moving from one sex to another. That's what it is. A transsexual is someone who changed sex.
Gender doesn't exist. Nobody cares what your article says: gender is a social construct, in other words, it doesn't exist anywhere beyond your silly head.
"Gender" is the accentuation of sex. In healthy societies, we take our differences and make them even more awesome because we love our differences. Men and women are attracted to their differences: women love men's strength, men love women's soft skins, etc.
In your sick society, you want everyone to be the same, homosexual, and you want everyone to pretend we're the same even when we're obviously not. This is akin to hating our differences.
But I digress. What you're trying to do is simple: take the fantasies of grown-up children and turn them into something respectable.
>In your sick society, you want everyone to be the same, homosexual, and you want everyone to pretend we're the same even when we're obviously not. This is akin to hating our differences.
Someone hasn't thought this through.
You're right, at it's core transsexualism is about change. But for change to exist, doesn't there need to be contrasting sides? Transsexual aren't looking to bash gender barriers, they're just looking for the right to choose which side you're on.
Again, that's the transsexual viewpoint. genderqueers and other various tumblr special snowflakes are another story all together.
>But for change to exist, doesn't there need to be contrasting sides?
The contrasting side being "not change". That's most people's case.
>Transsexual aren't looking to bash gender barriers, they're just looking for the right to choose which side you're on.
No, they're looking for an operation. The credibility of that operation is extremely low, as nobody but the gullible and lunatic will actually accept that a transsexual is the sex he was oeprated to become. If you've ever seen is a transsexual cock, you know what I mean. It's a farce. It's conscienceless surgeons who indulge the mentally ill for money.
You cannot choose your sex. Period. You can't fight gravity and start flying, either. Your sex is in your DNA, so even if you change your body, you're still the exact same sex you were born as. This cannot be changed. It's a scientific fact of life: your sex is forever.
Yes, you can ask the impossible, but you can't get it. It's not about right, it's about impossibility.
>The contrasting side being "not change". That's most people's case.
The "sexual" in "transsexual" means they want to change their sex, you even agreed to this earlier. I don't see your point.
>No, they're looking for an operation. The credibility of that operation is extremely low, as nobody but the gullible and lunatic will actually accept that a transsexual is the sex he was oeprated to become. If you've ever seen is a transsexual cock, you know what I mean. It's a farce. It's conscienceless surgeons who indulge the mentally ill for money.
Not all are. Non-ops are a thing. Something all transsexuals want however is to live normal lives as the opposite gender. No one gets SRS surgery for anyone but themselves. Even if FtM SRS is terrible, if it improves the life of the patient and they are happy with it, the surgery was a success.
>You cannot choose your sex. Period. You can't fight gravity and start flying, either. Your sex is in your DNA, so even if you change your body, you're still the exact same sex you were born as. This cannot be changed. It's a scientific fact of life: your sex is forever.
>Yes, you can ask the impossible, but you can't get it. It's not about right, it's about impossibility.
At first your argument was that transsexuals were ruining your society by tearing down your gender roles, but now it's a crime to support these gender roles if they aren't the specific ones you were born with.
Explain to me how switching sexes while still supporting the gender roles is destructive to your society.
>The "sexual" in "transsexual" means they want to change their sex
No, that means the change has happened. Wanting to be another doesn't make you anything. I'm not a transdolphin because I want to be a dolphin for fuck's sake.
Wishes =/= medical conditions
>Explain to me how switching sexes while still supporting the gender roles is destructive to your society.
Simple: you can't change sex. Forcing everyone to believe in a lie cannot be healthy to anyone, much less society. It's basic neurosis and we shouldn't indulge in that.
Lies aren't good things. It's destructive to society to undermine the man/woman relation. Because of your shit, men and women have a much harder time to get along. When our differences were praised on both sides, we got along better. We first UNDERSTOOD that we were different, and dealth with each other accordingly.
Because of silly ass feminism, men assume women are like them, and talk to them as such, and that always goes wrong. Any man learns that he must unlearn a lot to communicate with women. As a man, I often have to translate things both ways when I talk to women.
This shit isn't good.
Here's what happens, too:
>woman loves shopping
>man hates it
>woman hates mowing the lawn and gardening
>man loves it
>for some bullshit reason, both will force themselves and each other to do what they hate doing because that's "progressive"
This is the retarded level we have reached.
transgirl reporting in
All i want is to be happy. I don't care if people hate on me, i can deal with that. Tried ignoring it for 10 years, started abusing drugs, life was bad before..
I work in IT and earn 5.5k a month (first year of working) you want to tell me I'm doing nothing for society? I don't care about your lives either. I just want the best for everyone.
last but not least:
I always tell someone which gets close to me that I'm trans. I don' get offended if people don't call me "miss/girl" etc
>Tried ignoring it for 10 years
Ignoring what? There's nothing.
Your sex change does nothing for society, no. Sorry to break the news.
If you're not trolling, stick around. I'd like to talk more with you.
Are you from Dumblr?
I don't visit tumblr, the LGBT community sucks. attentio whores crying way to much. they should be happy they live in the western world.
there was something indeed, all my depressions are gone by now. life's got better and I'm far more productive.
OK, you sound like a faggot I can tolerate.
That means you're a man who got operated to look like a woman, right?
I have questions. I won't sugar coat anything but don't feel like I hate you either.
How do you know you "felt like a woman" having never been a woman?
How can you tell the difference if you've only been one of the two sexes?
Actually transsexualism is defined as those who experience GID, a medically recognized disorder. I was oversimplifying, but this is the definition.
There is no recorded disorder causing it's patient to wish to become a dolphin, but as soon as the medical community finds evidence to support it's existence I'll support it's treatment as well.
But it seems as though the lie is only dangerous when it is made known. So maybe it is not the lie itself that is dangerous but the prejudice towards it? There is a reason transsexuals "go stealth".
And there is nothing wrong with this. I plan to go stealth as soon as I pass as well.
I hate transgenders, they can't handle any critique. I once asked one transgender how he would handle the fact that he will never be true female. He got mad at me and some other transfags kept sending me hate messages for being intolerant and that he was 'obviously already female'.
This is a fucking normal question, I think I am far more open minded than most people, if they can't handle this normal question how will they handle society? Douchebags.
inb4 only 1 case, I tried asking the same question to more transgender people and I got the same reacction from all of them. Fuck transgenders. cis white male for ever.
>saying you are something doesn't make you something
It's not them saying it, though. It's the body of scientific work behind transgenderism. No such body of work exists for your "transdolphinism".
>There is no recorded disorder causing it's patient to wish to become a dolphin
You'd actually support a "treatment" to turn humans into dolphins.
You're fucking retarded.
>I'm depressed and suicidal
>I'll immediately help you to commit suicide
No, you fight the cause so it doesn't happen, you don't go along with the disease and make it happen! How fucking stupid are you?
I've always liked girly stuff, despite getting raised just like any other boy. If none was looking I'd often play with toys for girls when our family visited friends.
in school, everyone called me girly, but that was just how i was. I often got confused as a girl, which made me very happy.
Putting on girl clothes made me feel comfortable, it just feels right.
now, I can't really answer your question. That's just how it is. hard to explain this to someone
>It's the body of scientific work behind transgenderism.
C'mon man, this isn't the 19th century anymore. Scientists will write articles about whatever is popular at the moment. Study how that shit works, you'll understand.
The only reason why homosexuality was taken off the list of mental illnesses was a vote. Nothing more. They voted on it and tada, it's gone.
Very convincing. Scientists have found a condition where people think they're dolphins, by the way. There's a whole body of work on the subject.
Sex is the act of fucking.
Gender is a boolean value, specifying male or female. Hermaphrodites are either none-functioning deformities of their submissive gender (either their peepee no work or their vagoo is just a fluke).
Everything else is hormonal imbalance, social pressure to be different, cries for attention and plain old insanity.
By nurturing these groups of people, we're keeping it alive. In "ye ole times" they would be bannished from the tribe and left to the wolves.
Shit, I thought about including some pithy sentence about how you'd surely respond with how science isn't right, but you somehow are, but decided against it.
Homosexuality was taken off because the definition of mental illness includes that it causes discomfort for the sufferer. This is not the case with homosexuality. Even Freud responded to a concerned parent that homosexuality wasn't an issue. You know, for your 19th century flair.
Also, burden of proof.
>I've always liked girly stuff
No. Girly stuff will vary from culture to culture, so that's not an argument.
Every boy plays with girly stuff sooner or later, even if just by curiosity.
My point is this: if you'd been raised by wolves in a forest, without any other human being in sight, you'd not have a problem. This makes me think your problem is vastly overrated.
I believe it's a psychological problem which requires psychological help, not surgery.
The real problem is elsewhere and you haven't solved that. You've just tried to adapt to the secondary problem instead.
>transsexuals don't want to be with other trannies
>nontrannies don't want to be with trannies
How this sounds like a solution to ANYONE is beyond me.
And which one is that?
>You'd actually support a "treatment" to turn humans into dolphins.
I never said that. I said I'd support the treatment. It may be as simple as a dose of lithium.
As fact that you seem unwilling to treat the clearly ill is more startling.
>>I'm depressed and suicidal
>>I'll immediately help you to commit suicide
>No, you fight the cause so it doesn't happen, you don't go along with the disease and make it happen! How fucking stupid are you?
>implying assisted suicide isn't a thing.
If you can find a treatment for gender dysphoria other than transitioning that doesn't have a suicide rate higher than it's success rate, I'm all ears.
Doctors don't fight illnesses, they improve patients lives. Usually they are one in the same, but this is a case where they are different. Fighting the disorder would only make it worse. Go we go along with it, and poof, it disappears. What's so wrong with this treatment?
>Sex is the act of fucking.
No. Sex, the way you mean it, is a secondary meaning. First meaning was always a physical description. Your sex is your cock or cunt. That's what sex is. "To have sex" came later.
Your sex is either male or female. By association, your sex is what a lot of people refer to as "gender". The word "gender" comes from grammar, in which it means the gender of a noun, masculine, feminine, or neutral.
Twist this any way you want, but that's how it is.
Your lot wanted the word sex to be replaced by gender, which you took from a completely unrelated field.
The point of changing what words mean is to blur the lines about things that are perfectly knowable and scientific and to move them into the land of feefees and triggards.
I've felt like this since I'm, 5? 4? just your ordinary little kid with no clue about life. and I've got loving and caring parents. there's nothing else.
if i had been raised by wolves, i would still feel like this once I'd start living in our civilization. I don't get you.
>Homosexuality was taken off because the definition of mental illness includes that it causes discomfort for the sufferer.
I guess killing oneself counts as major evidence for discomfort and homosexuals have higher rates of suicide than heterosexuals.
>inb4 blaming society for it
Closet homos kill themselves too, not because they're bullied, they're not, but because their homosexual tendencies cause them major discomfort.
You've destroyed your own argument.
I'll destroy it further. Ready? Brace yourself and clench your buttcheeks, unless you're a faggot, in which case, apply lube and enjoy the ride.
(Hope this isn't the thread where I'm supposed to remain civil because I'm not rewriting this shit.)
So, you said a mental illness needs to cause discomfort to be one.
What about that lady who married the Eiffel Tower because she's sexually attracted to objects? She literally fucks the Eiffel Tower and faps to it. She feels fine as fuck. She feels no discomfort whatsoever and even thinks objects are easier to fuck with than people.
No discomfort. Are you so sure comfort is the right parameter for mental illness?
What about psychopaths? One guy tortures, rapes, and murders, then eats a little girl. No discomfort felt during the acts.
Is he mentally sane then?
>projecting own issues on societies you know nothing about
I hate it when people do this. Always this appeal to "nature people" who must have had some magic way of life that was somehow perfect to the person expousing it. I hate it when you do it to support your bullshit, and I hate it when whiny, lefty cunts do it to claim that modern society is mean and awful and everyone in a tribal society was a special flower child.
Tribal life is nasty, brutish, and short. A tribe can have any number of insane rules that are adhered to for no reason whatsoever. Many Pacific tribes have some form of ritualised child abuse where men of the tribe pass on their sperm in some way to boys, so that they can become men. Because magic. I've never heard of a single tribe that wasn't in a constant state of warfare with surrounding tribes.
You don't know about tribal life, and you're projecting your own insecurities on that void. You're just saying what YOU would do if you were a tribe's head honcho.
>In "ye ole times" they would be bannished from the tribe and left to the wolves.
In "ye ole times" we shat in bushes and ripped each other's hearts out and offered them to the gods.
"Ye ole times" weren't that great.
>My point is this: if you'd been raised by wolves in a forest, without any other human being in sight, you'd not have a problem.
As fun as your thought experiments are, actual science says otherwise.
Even without the social aspect, the physical issues that arise with puberty would cause issue with the victim.
>As fact that you seem unwilling to treat the clearly ill is more startling.
The fuck? If someone is depressive, I fight their depression, I don't indulge in it. I mentioned that because euthanasia is indeed a thing and your line of thinking leads to euthanising the depressive, which is fucking retarded.
Before we think of treatments, we need to think of what the problem actually is.
I think you guys have the wrong problem in mind.
You think it's possible for a man to feel like he's really a woman. How can that be possible if you haven't been both and can compare?
Some people think they're really dragons (see Dumblr). Does that mean they have a legit call to ask other people's money to get operated into one?
Children fantasise like this all the time and pretend to be all sorts of things. That's normal. That's what children do.
I think tranny wannabes have a case of arrested development where they never quite leave the fantasy phase of childhood and get attached to that fantasies for very wrong reasons.
There doesn't seem to be anything empirical about one's desire to transition.
>if i had been raised by wolves, i would still feel like this once I'd start living in our civilization. I don't get you.
In my example, you don't get to any civilisation. A mental problem, an actual real mental problem, does not need a civilisation.
The schizophrenic will hallucinate and hear voices without civilisation. It's a brain disorder, it's real.
You wouldn't have any problem in your wolf familiy. Thus, it's not a brain problem. It's a psychological thing which should be treated psychologically.
Trannsexualism, as the act of changing sex, is like telling the schziphrenics that, yes, we will build you a fortress to protect you from the giant blue space squid that threatens to attack you if you don't kill children; short of that, we will help you kill children so the squid doesn't get you.
>Even without the social aspect, the physical issues that arise with puberty would cause issue with the victim.
I'm not reading your link. You're here, you present your case. Sources =/= your argument.
What kind of issues can you have if you don't even have a concept of gender to begin with?
What kind of empirical problem can you have?
The trannsexual boy in this thread cannot tell us a single empirical issue. He validated my wolf thought experiment perfectly.
Back to you.
There's no way this won't come off as rude, but fuck it: You don't understand disorders and the science of psychology, and there is no responding to your arguments because of that.
your reasoning lacks common sense, I'm sorry.
I ask again. Why do you care so much about me wanting to be happy? Why would you even care. I told you I'm fine with getting labeled as trans, whatever.
Atleast I'm happy.
>You think it's possible for a man to feel like he's really a woman. How can that be possible if you haven't been both and can compare?
I've never been given a car, so I guess I can't really tell if I'd enjoy it or not, right?
And I'm sure in the last 60 years no one's thought of "traumatizing events" as a cause for transsexualism. The thing about arrested development is that it can be traced back to a point, there is always a triggering event. Such does not exist in transsexualism.
Fucking lolled. Europe is invaded by MILLIONS of immigrants and our nations SUPPORT that.
Besides, America started as a melting pot of many nations. You're multiculturalism incarnate, whereas we Europeans are nations of people of similar biological appearance.
We're getting raped big time.
>You don't understand disorders and the science of psychology, and there is no responding to your arguments because of that.
The problem isn't that it's rude - it's not - but that it's wrong. I do understand disorders. I've known a bunch myself, and I have studied psychology at academic levels.
All I see is you not having much else to say than talk about me as a person when you should focus on arguments.
Don't act like you're only talking to me. This is a public board where 80% of the people using it are lurkers. They only read. We're talking to them too. So even if you think I can't be convinced, you'd make a sore mistake to think nobody else can. (None of this matters since you don't actually think that, you just have nothing else to use against me, so ad hominem galore.)
Gender Dysphoria is not an issue with gender roles alone. There is also body dysphoria, where the person has anxiety and depressive thoughts about one's body as it does not fit the sex they feel their body should fit.
You don't need to understand the concept of a vagina to feel that your penis is out of place.
>your reasoning lacks common sense, I'm sorry.
Mind actually showing me how and why? Or you're just throwing nonsense in the air?
>I ask again. Why do you care so much about me wanting to be happy?
How is this question relevant to anything? It's not. I'll still answer it. For personal reasons, I care about everyone and want everyone to be happy. It's not especially unique to want the best for everyone. The ways in which we accomplish this, however, differ widely.
That said, the concern wasn't you personally, but on a societal level.
>labeled as a trans
Well, aren't you transsexual?
Then imagine for one second what it feels like to be a woman. Imagine waking up tomorrow, cunt and boobs in place and having to live with that.
I think the thought would make you uncomfortable if you are very comfortable in your male body.
If I woke up as the opposite sex tomorrow, I'd laugh it off for a day before it'd get seriously uncomfortable for me.
If you feel comfortable in your own skin, why is it so hard for you to imagine that other people feel uncomfortable in their own bodies? If this is true. then the reverse can also be true.
You don't need to "experience" the other sex in order to know "something" is wrong. Did someone ever ask you whether you enjoyed fucking guys? No? Well you never tried it, so how would you know.
It's the same fucking logic, only it applies to a heterosexual standard. It's the same bullshit which comes with "hurr you chose to be gay".
I'm not with tumblrshits, I'm bisexual and I don't particularly care about "muh rights". I'll just calmly explain it to people if they ask and if they don't want to accept it, that's their choice.
>I've never been given a car, so I guess I can't really tell if I'd enjoy it or not, right?
Apples and oranges. Driving a car is an activity, and as such, you can compare it to other activities with common traits.
Sex is part of your being, and you can only be you, you can only be the sex you already are: in other words, you can never compare.
Driving can be compared to other ways of moving: walking, running, riding a bike, flying, etc. A single person can experience all of them.
A single person cann't experience more than one sex. For these reasons, the comparison is not valid.
>And I'm sure in the last 60 years no one's thought of "traumatizing events" as a cause for transsexualism.
Don't be too sure. Traumatising events can lead to pretty much anything in the psychological realm. Some people will want to be the other sex as a coping mechanism: if I am a man, men will not want to rape me, etc. The unconscious can do improbable things.
>Such does not exist in transsexualism.
Except the transsexual man in this thread clearly told us otherwise. He said that he would become a tranny upon meeting civilisation. That was his trigger. So it's clearly a psychological problem, not a brain disorder, and as thus, should be treated psychologically, not with scalpels.
>thoughts about one's body as it does not fit the sex they feel their body should fit.
Would that exist in the wolf scenario? If you need other humans to get that disorder, then it isn't a brain disorder but a psychological issue.
Do we agree on this?
And yes, you do need to have a vagina to miss having one. You can't feel that your penis is out of place if you don't know any better.
Even if that were the case, it still doesn't imply that you should bend reality to your disorder.
>Then imagine for one second what it feels like to be a woman. Imagine waking up tomorrow, cunt and boobs in place and having to live with that
I can, but I've been a man before, in that scenario, so it doesn't work out either way.
The only way to support this is reincarnation. That is the only way I can accept transsexualism in any sort of way as being rational. Are you willing to go there?
I've had too many discussions like these to know where this is going. You've made up your mind that LGBT people existing is somehow a bad thing, despite it not influencing you in the slightest, and you're going to apply all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify not only the viewpoint, but actually treating LGBT people like second class citizens.
It's that second part I have a problem with. I have no need or motivation to convince you or others that your understanding of transgenderism is wrong, or bigoted. You have the right to hold those opinions, and the consensus of anyone who's actually active in the field is that you are wrong. My problem starts when people like you start taking their manufactored offense and try to change society to fit your bill. In fact, that's the problem I have with immigrants and the people who support immigration, the socialists.
What I think is great about the West is the lack of focus on beating everyone into the same mould. Without a doubt it is Western culture that made Western society great, and part of Western culture is to respect the outliers rather than trying to beat them back in line.
I am perfectly willing to go there actually. I understand where you're coming from but I firmly believe that it's a problem located in the brain. Much like other problems one cannot necessarily help (I wouldn't compare it to autism per se but it is a mental disorder. Hell my bisexuality might be a mental disorder but I don't particularly care because it's not harmful.)
I guess I understand your reasoning because you'd already have been a man before. But I wanted to illustrate that that's how transgender/sexual people feel. Like it's just "off" somehow.
But I have actually thought of transsexuality as reincarnation before. But then again I don't hold any proof for reincarnation either, so who's to say that that would make it true.
Say we accept that reincarnation is true, why can't we (and by that I mostly mean you) accept that transsexualism is therefore real either?
Being the other gender can be compared however to similar experiences.
You can wear makeup, dress in the other gender's clothes, copy their mannerisms, etc. How is this different?
>Don't be too sure. Traumatising events can lead to pretty much anything in the psychological realm. Some people will want to be the other sex as a coping mechanism: if I am a man, men will not want to rape me, etc. The unconscious can do improbable things.
That was sarcasm, it was the one of the first things they looked at. And they have treat the treatment for arrested development on transsexual. Want to take a guess at how that turned out?
>And yes, you do need to have a vagina to miss having one. You can't feel that your penis is out of place if you don't know any better.
>Even if that were the case, it still doesn't imply that you should bend reality to your disorder.
Sure you can. You might not know what the alternative is, but that doesn't stop you from being able to say "I really hate this about myself.
>I've had too many discussions like these to know where this is going.
Assuming this much about me doesn't bode well for you as a person. I don't know where this is going so there's no reason for you to assume you're any wiser about it.
>You've made up your mind that LGBT people existing is somehow a bad thing
That is true, but irrelevant to the conversation. LGBT are a bunch of useful idiots who don't know that the ones who fund them aren't on their side. They also don't realise that they make homos and trans more vulnerable because of their actions. Russians wouldn't be so hard on homos if lgbt wasn't so flaming and wasn't trying to stirr shit à la Dumblr in their country. LGBT fucks around, Russian homos suffer for it. That alone should be enough to think they're a bad thing.
That said, storming old people in their church while they're celebrating is another reason why LGBT people are a bad thing. You don't break 70-year-old hips because you have an opinion. I don't see Christians breaking into sodomites' bedrooms to induce coitus interruptus in anal lovers, do I?
> despite it not influencing you in the slightest
That's where you err. It influences everyone. Why would we care otherwise? Either way, you kno what doesn't influence me in the slightest either? Children getting raped by rich people in third world countries. Zero influence on me. Do I care? Yes. My personal well-being isn't a reason for me to care about this thing or another. You guys can't understand that those who oppose fag marriage do so for altruistic reasons because your world is solely based on individualism, as your masters wanted it to be. Individuals are weak. Groups are strong, so your master break every group you can be a part of: nation, family, race, religion. That's why LGBT is a bad group of useful idiots, They participate in the war effort against everyone.
LGBT is the worst movement ever which happened for us trans people.
Should've stayed LGB, but even then, i would feel sorry for sane homosexual people.
trans is something completely different anyways
if i could I'd kill every single LGBT rights activist. they only made it worse.
Buzzword detected. Give your exact definition for it. Let's see what I think of it.
>hen people like you start taking their manufactored offense and try to change society to fit your bill
Funny, that. It's what you do. Now some countries are forced to teach "gender theory" to children. Children are being taught that being a boy or a girl is just a choice. But I'm the bigot here, and I manufacture offense and change society to my liking. Right.
>What I think is great about the West is the lack of focus on beating everyone into the same mould.
What the fuck? This is exactly what is happening: everyone is being beaten into the same mould because if you dare think ANYTHING OTHER THAN what you're supposed to, you will be beaten into it. You're a living example of that. "Bigoted". Anyone who doesn't confirm will be called this and other things as well.
There is no respect for people in the West. It's fascism dressed as democracy, and you're the useful idiot of it.
I think the problem is we're classifying this wrong. The correct term, in a psychiatric viewpoint, for bisexuality, transexuality, etc. is actually a "deviation". No, not in the derogatory sense of the term, but in the fact that it "deviates" from the norm. It's nothing to be ashamed of, attacked, or mistreated for. It's simply that the person classifies in a lower percentage than the general population when it comes to certain aspects about their behavior.
A mental disorder is that which makes a person unable to correctly function in society. Pride parade types, for example, I consider to have a mental disorder, but it is not their sexuality. It's a behavioral thing called a histrionic personality disorder, where a person feels if they're not the center of attention, they're doing something wrong.
TL;DR: Psychiatry Major, BITCH.
>But I wanted to illustrate that that's how transgender/sexual people feel. Like it's just "off" somehow.
I'd gladly believe that but every tran I ask tells me it wouldn't be a problem until they meet society, as the guy here said.
If that is true, and I don't think they're lying, then that shows there is no actual brain problem as the person doesn't feel inadequate in their body. It's normal, until they see other human beings and somehow want to be girls. I can't put much stock in that.
Now, if someone is a Buddhist and believes in past lives and argue they were another sex in a previous life, then I'll take it. I don't disbelieve in reincarnation and the rest, and that'd make more sense than whatever else. I know of physical signs that passed on to another life, so a sexuality wouldn't shock me. But you're going to have to push reincarnation, souls, along with your demands for new rights.
P.S. I agree with the idea that LGBT makes things harder for people of different orientations who just want to live a normal life.
Relevant to discussion.
> LGBT are a bunch of useful idiots
So then you'd be talking about the community but not necessarily about those who /are/ actually transgender/homosexual etc. right? (and no I'm not talking about ''genderqueer'' or anything special snowflakey.)
I agree that LGBT is way too flamboyant but I do not necessarily feel that you think of anyone who does not identify as straight is necessarily bad. From what I can read it's mostly the actions you condemn. If not true, you can correct me on that.
Let's be fair here that Russian does not simply condemn the homos for what the LGBT movement does in the United States. Their sort of fear comes from this instinct of "it's unnatural and an abomination, let's cruelly punish those who are like it". Not very unlike being beaten for being left-handed in ye olde days.
They essentially believe it's disgusting, and a child not not be exposed to such vile acts, or even risk turning gay himself. (which is a fallacy, obviously.) It's not because of whatever a movement does in another country and even if so - there is still a ton of prejudice against homosexuals even without these parades.
Attitudes do not change without activism, but I do not agree with the sort of activism its trying to advertise here. Still, acceptance of homosexuals is slowly moving forward. Which I don't believe to be a bad thing.
>You can wear makeup, dress in the other gender's clothes, copy their mannerisms, etc. How is this different?
It's different in that those things are activities, accessories, etc. You can do all these and you'll still never experience what it is like to be a woman, because you aren't a woman for wearing woman clothes.
Being a woman means your body is female. That's the only way to experience being a woman.
>Sure you can. You might not know what the alternative is, but that doesn't stop you from being able to say "I really hate this about myself.
Then why don't trans say this? I asked the one in this thread and he clearly said that the problem didn't arise until he saw others. In other words, he felt nothing was wrong with his body until he realised girls had toys he liked better.
Oh I don't feel it's a derogatory term at all, it is a deviation of the "norm" after all. I simply do not believe that bisexuality, homosexuality or whatever is as normal as people want to make it seem like it is.
I mean to be it is "normal" but normal in the sense that the majority of people 'suffer' from a condition such as this. (I consider it perfectly fine to deviate from these norms, but it is not 'the standard' if you get my meaning.)
Exactly as you're already saying, it's nothing to be attacked for, but it /is/ a deviation. I mean I'm sure tumblr will disagree and cry that it's simply our society that makes it seem that way, but I'm pretty sure there are more heterosexual people who are fine with their assigned gender than there are "deviations". Hence why such things /are/ deviations in the first place.
And thanks for the deviation mention btw, I was actually looking for the correct term but couldn't come up with anything but "disorder".
Hmmmhm. I see what you mean, even if I politely disagree.
I don't think it's pushing for anything, if you want to get piercings or I dunno, body modification scars whatever - it's all fine. There are of course consequences attached to it (which I don't think are fair entirely, but we do have to realize that they are present), but that's that. If you want to change your sex because it makes you more comfortable in the way it aligns with your mind, then by all means go for it.
Maybe people don't know about past lives or simply do not believe in them. Hell it could be a possibility, especially in order to understand 'why' they feel the way they do. Some would therefore be more comfortable with a switch of gender than others, if they'd have had a lot of lives maybe and switched continuously.
It's not necessarily demanding new rights, as it is a simple acknowledgement of someone's gender. You don't have to accept it, but being rude to some stranger for what they did to their own body seems weird to me.
But then again, I'm accepting of trans people. I have a classmate whom I get along with super well, but he's also really chill about his transition.
>I will personally remain civil during this thread. I welcome opposition as long as you have ideas and arguments and don't attack me personally, as I won't attack you personally. This thread is about ideas and a person having different ideas shouldn't be hated for it, at least not in this thread.
Hey great, you came to the asshole of the internet, and feel you can dictate my behavior? This is /b/, your thread belongs in >>>/lgbt/, so Expect what you get here, because you don't make the rules.
/b/ has and will, h8 everyone. (I hate myself for being here some days) I don't invite myself over to your house and tell you how you should act, so my summerfriend, you have no cause to dictate my emotions/behavior while you sit in a public forum known for attacking people.
I think you're a self absorbed idiot from tumblr, and the name for you is asshat.
Not a personal attack, just an observation. 3/8 for me responding to your b8
>So then you'd be talking about the community but not necessarily about those who /are/ actually transgender/homosexual etc. right?
Precisely. I think homos and the rest are unfortunate victims in a political scam. Unlike the rest of us, homos and trans and the rest can actually voice disagreement.
> I do not necessarily feel that you think of anyone who does not identify as straight is necessarily bad.
I don't like when someone has to "identify" with anything. You're straight, gay, or bisexual, or asexual. Don't make a choice. I'm not saying homos are bad, but I don't like when it's considered a "life-style". It's not. It's a sexuality and that's all it should be.
I also don't think society as a whole should adapt to the wishes of the very few. That's not how things should work. Marriage wasn't necessary, for instance, a specific union for homos was absolutely feasible, with the same rights given. The reason they wanted more wasn't just for themselves, but mostly to spite yet another tradition.
Remember, the masters want you to destroy every network you can have: family, nation, race, religion. There's a reason why a straight white male will fund femen, lgbt and the rest of these degenerates, and that reason isn't the cause of these useful idiots.
Of course, of course. The thing is, what is "normal" is what is most common. Since humans are an animal, then logically it's more common for viable reproductive practices to be more common than homosexuality and other alternative preferences (no, I don't believe there's such a thing as a homosexual "lifestyle". There's a flamboyant lifestyle, definitely, but it ain't exclusively gay, nor are all gay people like that). That doesn't mean that these men and women have any less rights than a person who fits the norm (a "normal" person, if you will. See that, Tumblr? That's the word's correct etymology).
It's also true that until we as a species and society can accept that there are people who are different from us, and that that is okay, discrimination's not going anywhere. It is, after all, a result of fear of the unknown. But in order for this to happen, people have got to say "Hey, you know what. I'm different from you. You're different from me. And that's alright. Now let's find other petty shit to disagree about."
Oh, I didn't mention that? We're always gonna find something to engage in conflict about. This is because we only got as far in this world as we have specifically because of our bellicose instincts.
But the same could be said for your analogy. You can run, walk, skip, fly, but it'll never be the same as driving.
I'm tempted to make a calculus reference but I won't.
>Then why don't trans say this? I asked the one in this thread and he clearly said that the problem didn't arise until he saw others. In other words, he felt nothing was wrong with his body until he realised girls had toys he liked better.
I cannot speak for others. Besides, posts made by a /b/tard are hardly a solid source in a debate.
>you're allowed to express your opinion
can't say nigger, faggot, retard, queer, etc.
can't say merry christmas
can't vote for prop 8
can't say "marriage should be for men/women only"
can't hobby lobby
can't smoke a cigarette
Oh no not at all. I don't think any sexuality is a "lifestyle", that's just fucking weird. My sexuality doesn't come /up/ at all times. I don't see the point of mentioning it, unless it becomes a topic of discussion.
There is no lifestyle attached to a sexuality, that's just moronic imho. I don't like it either, so you're not alone. Most of my friends deviate on the sexuality spectrum, either asexual or lesbians or what have you, and none of them see any of this as a "lifestyle". More as something that barely comes up and no one really gives a fuck about.
The thing about marriage however is that it's not specifically related to religion, even if it was most commonly brought back by religion. My parents are not religious, they got married. Should they be held to the same standard as homosexuals?
Especially considering union bonds are not exactly the same as marriage. And besides having a wedding can be fantastic for some people, why can't they have it?
I don't think they wanted to spite traditions, I just think that they had just as much of a right to have the dresses and the cakes and the shebang and be as legally recognized as a heterosexual couple. I mean - separation of church and state man. To say to one person "you cant have this thing" is rather rude based on something as negligible as sexuality.
But, again, I do see your point.
Exactly that, I'm glad we agree. And as already stated above, sexuality (whichever sexuality) is not a lifestyle. It's simply that - attraction to whatever gender you prefer.
No you did mention it, which is why I thanked you for it haha.
I base the assumption on experience, which is perfectly natural. Now you're acting like a socialist, arguing that perfectly acceptable heuristics imply an opponent is subhuman in some way.
Russian anti-gay measures are the result of Christian dogma. Poetin has supported the church and "traditional values" ever since he gained power. LGBT activists have nothing to do with it. And even if they did, your argument boils down to victim-blaming. And before you scream "Dumblr", that term is mostly used against lefty politics and policies where I'm from. Because, you know, they do the same whenever some Islamic piece of shit commits a crime. A few months ago two such pieces of shit were shot during an armed robbery, and of course the focus shifted immediately to the white natives who committed the grave crime of owning a gun and using it to defend themselves. The existence of radical LGBT activists does not excuse the enacting of a law that targets anyone who is seen as a "deviant". The law itself is wrong.
Begging the question. Your enthusiasm on the issue proves nothing except your interest. And yet again you equate homosexuality and transgenderism to crime that transgresses personal boundaries. First it was murder, now it is rape.
And your conspiracy theory is where shit begins to actually turn into craziness. I think I might have seen you post before, with that misunderstanding of what individualism means.
Nigger, gays and transgenders have been around forever, and they will be around forever. Psychology proves this, archeology proves this, history proves this. Therefor the assertation that the act of simply not persecuting LGBT folk will tear apart Western culture is bullshit. You know what is tearing apart Western culture? Cultural Marxism. Allowing gay marriage is nothing but smart governing.
>I don't think it's pushing for anything
> If you want to change your sex because it makes you more comfortable in the way it aligns with your mind, then by all means go for it.
That's what they're pushing: individualism. But not the good kind, instead, the kind that makes you weaker in every regard.
Piercings will make you weaker on the work market, as it will bar you from many jobs, as it should be. There's no genuine argument in favor of piercings and tattoos, only pseudo, self-centered arguments.
A society where every individual thinks of himself only cannot survive for long. That's what's wrong with this way of thinking. Since we're being taxed for others quite a lot, you can't rely on people working for themselves only. Yet this is what is demanded of us: work and spend 30% of that money on people who don't respect you. I'm forced to pay the abortions of the whores of my country even though it's against my will, even though my dentist isn't covered by my own insurance.
>You don't have to accept it, but being rude to some stranger for what they did to their own body seems weird to me.
Let's be clear: offline, with strangers, I'd never be offensive or even comment or anything. I'm a racist person but I'm always polite to black people (only race I dislike). I'm on good terms with homos and I don't recall having met a tran person. I think everyone should be civil no matter what, but when it comes to politics, I think we need to man up and not behave like it's a tea party.
Now, I consider transsexualism to be a fraud, that a man will always be a man and vice versa. I also think that not telling your future partner that your real sex is the other is a betrayal of someone's trust, as most people will have a major problem with that.
Since when couldn't you say those things? What you want is to be able to express your opinions without any recourse. That my friend is the double edged sword of free speech, you can say whatever you want but don't surprised when people talk back.
>Hey great, you came to the asshole of the internet, and feel you can dictate my behavior?
I didn't come to the asshole of the Internet. What the fuck, who do you think you are, punk? You think I'm some Dumblr moron who discovered /b/ yesterday? Shut the fuck up right now. I do whatever the fuck I want and I'll dictate whatever I want to whoever I want. That's what /b/ stands for: freedums.
I've deviated from my initial idea due to forgetting which thread was what, so I quickly resumed normal 4chan mode. Then I tried being somewhat civil. Not to you though, fuck that.
I've tried LGBT before but I just get banned and my thread deleted.
>/b/ has and will, h8 everyone
You sound like a fucking newfag. Anyone who's been here for a bit know this to be untrue. /b/ is full of hot love.
You know what you are? You're a retard. You got butthurt by my opening post and wrote a whole fucking post about it. Did I "trigger" you? I did. Nothing in your post is of interest to anyone else but yourself. It's masturbation. it's what Dumblr does best, so why don't you go post your shit there? Nobody has anything to gain from your shitposting and you can do nothing but accept that fact. You have nothing to say except:
>I'm the real /b/ and I don't like what you've done
The real /b/ isn't such a whiny bitch, you fucking cunt. I've been here for many years and don't give a rat's ass what you think I should or shouldn't do. I'll still educate your young summery ass because you sorely need it.
But yeah, please try Dumblr. It's what you need, you whiny faggot.
But you also want to push for psychiatric treatment, which will also cost the state (and your tax funds) money. So - is there really a difference then?
I think if people would be accepting of, I dunno, someone who is more masculine or feminine than they "ought" to be for their gender, they should be accepted. So if that's the case when someone changed their gender, I don't see why anyone would care.
If they work just as hard, if they do their job properly, if they're good with customers, what gives?
Shame to know you're racist but I won't argue with you on that. And with abortions I keep the notion that you should pay for those yourself, instead of forcing someone else to do it (unless you were raped). I'm fine with them normally.
And I really do think your partner deserves to know everything about you, so that includes a sex change. I'd tell my partner I've snogged people of another sex too, should they have issues with that. (perhaps a little less extreme of a secret though.)
You definitely are manufacturing offense when you take one extreme example, twist it to fit your need and apply it across the board. That's the definition of manufacturing offense.
No, Anon, that's not happening. As you can tell by your right to post this. Shit, you can even say this shit out in the open without being arrested. You are not oppressed, you special, little snowflake. And you know what? I'd defend your right to say it, even as I'd oppose you trying to expand your shitty opinion into oppressive policy.
You want to know my definition of "bigoted"? It's my personal fucking opinion, and like I stated in the post you're quoting I'm not here to explain why I think you're bigoted, because it's moot to the entire discussion.
my entire point is to allow everyone the maximum amount of personal freedom. Your point is to restrict freedom of arbitrary groups because of your own personal beliefs.
An intelligent, cultured debate about sexuality on 4Chan. Must be the end of days.
Look, even scientists can't understand the human mind in its entirety. And you're trying to claim that a man will always be a man and viceversa. There's no scientific basis for that opinion. And while I respect your right to possess that opinion, I WOULD request that, for the purposes of this debate, you support it with some sort of data or reasoning. Otherwise, all we're gonna be doing is chasing each other's tails for a long long while, and I do want to see where this debate goes..
>I don't think they wanted to spite traditions, I just think that they had just as much of a right to have the dresses and the cakes and the shebang and be as legally recognized as a heterosexual couple. I mean - separation of church and state man.
You can't ask religions to change for you, though. Nothing prevents anyone from organising a party where you officialise your union to a partner, even if it's informal. You can do that with a civil union as well. The state cannot tell the church what to do.
Also, friendly reminder that, in American, the separate of church and state was established to PROTECT THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE, not the other way around. Remember, a nation built by pilgrims who were persecuted by the state for their religion. That is what this law means: the state shall not attack the religion.
Leftist psychology as analyzed by Tedausz Kaczynski;
When we speak of leftists in this article we have in
mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types,
feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and
the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these
movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing
leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological
type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by
"leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of
leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.
The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we
call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of
inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while
oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of
modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.
I didn't mean to offend. I simply gave an example of a personality disorder (histrionic) which fits the characteristics of the LGBT group. I'd like to state, for the record, that histrionic personality disorder is unique in the attention-seeking. Most people who suffer from personality disorders try not to call attention to it.
If I may ask (and it's not too invasive), what does your friend suffer from?
By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings
in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low
self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies,
defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend
to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these
feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said
about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that
he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is
pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong
to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are
hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms
"negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an
Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory
connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents
of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been
attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal
rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and
insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist
anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about
primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative.
They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem
almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive
culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that
primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the
hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
>To say to one person "you cant have this thing" is rather rude based on something as negligible as sexuality.
Sure, but that's not what it was. Everyone had the same rights already: you could marry someone of the other sex. Same rights.
Now, some were different and demanded the law be adapted to them. They didn't act like it was a favor, but as if it was a right. It was a favour, it never was a right. Society defined marriage a certain way, you can't act like it owes anyone anything based on a particular form of logic.
Originally, marriage wasn't for love, it was to make children and raise them, feed them, etc. Families were small companies, essential to the survival of a civilisation.
Now it's about "love" and more individualistic shit, to weaken networks, as always.
Results? Divorces, children left alone, parental authority weaker than ever, homos can marry, your horse is my future bride in about 10 years, etc.
It is going down. Homos once said they wanted civil union so they'd not ask for marriage. 15 years down the line, they asked for marriage and got it.
Wait some more and they'll ask for children. Since orphans are scarce in the west, they'll get children from other countries. You'll end up with a market for that. People will grow babies to sell homos (and pedos will happily join in, as small babies can't testify to two adult men shooting loads on its little face).
I don't like the place we're going.
Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect"
terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant,
abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of
whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from
privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold
among university professors, who have secure employment with
comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white
males from middle-class families.
Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of
groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American
Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists
themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit
it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely
because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with
their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE
inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).
Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as
strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women
may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong,
good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western
civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The
reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not
correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West
because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so
forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in
primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he
GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points
out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in
Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the
leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates
America and the West because they are strong and successful.
Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative",
"enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and
leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic,
pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them,
take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense
of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy
his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of
competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.
>Now you're acting like a socialist
>Russian anti-gay measures are the result of Christian dogma.
No. You can't blame Jesus for everything you hate, like the masters tell you to. Russians hate homos for a few reasons:
1. homos and pedos are the same thing to them; linguistically, this can be explained by the fact that the word they use means both
2. Russians can see what's happening in the West, and believe me, when they see the gay pride stuff, activists, and the rest, their reaction is "fuck no, never here!"
Christ has nothing to do with this. What LGBT does in the West affects how Russians will consider the homo question.
When Russians see videos of LGBT activists storming churches in America, pushing old people aside and breaking church material, statues, etc, their reaction is, "Never here."
Homos in Russia pay for that. Thank you LGBT.
Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science,
objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally
relative. But it is obvious that
modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians
systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply
involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack
these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one
thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent
that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More
importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they
classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and
other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings
of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification
of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or
inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the
concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are
antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior
because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or
inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or
blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is
"inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been
brought up properly.
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of
inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter,
a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith
in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but
he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong,
and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant
behavior.  But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings
of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as
individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the
leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization
or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists
protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke
police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be
effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but
because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist
Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion
or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the
leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle
cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too
prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power.
Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of
benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help.
For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black
people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or
dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a
diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal
and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative
action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take
such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs.
Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems
serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and
frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black
people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white
majority tends to intensify race hatred.
>And your conspiracy theory is where shit begins to actually turn into craziness.
It's not a conspiracy in the sense that it's plain to see. Check who benefits from anything, you might discover who wanted it to happen and why.
>Nigger, gays and transgenders have been around forever, and they will be around forever.
Are you calling me a nigger or are you telling me about niggers? Either way, that's not an argument.
Guess what pushes lgbt, femen, and the rest? Allowing gay marriage is cultural marxism. It's nothing but one more step in the same multicult direction.
Irony being that homos themselves pay for it.
>allow fag marriage
>Muslims hate homos even more
>multicults love everyone
>Muslims beat up homos
>multicults don't care, love everyone
Lack of authority is tearing apart Europe right now. We will either become one lame ass country on a quick road to death or regain national sovereignties and turn into neo-fascist states.
All that Dumblr crap is fuelling the fascism of tomorrow, believe me.
Give it 30 years and people will take arms against this multicult shit, and yes, lgbt, femen, etc, it's all part of the multicult agenda.
Really depends on the country you're in to be honest. Where I live, homosexual couples are already allowed to adopt children. The only people who have serious issues with that are very conservative Christians and Muslims.
Isn't it a good thing? Children are growing up in orphanages in dire circumstances is preferable to being raised by two men or two women? I don't believe that, and thank god my country doesn't either.
And I know this is hard to believe for you maybe but -
It's not paedophilic at all. Assuming homosexuals are attracted to children is a gross generalization of the past, and not at all true.
You mention weakening networks, but we're not primal apes destined for simply reproducing anymore. We do hold love, and dreams, and ambitions. Simply abandoning all of that would render us to little more than robots. Besides, we're over populated anyway. Lesser children is a good thing with how long people are living nowadays.
If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would
have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse
for making a fuss.
We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate
description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only
a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of
powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means
by which our society socializes children is by making them feel
ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's
expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is
especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of
HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized
person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of
the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a
significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty
thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate
someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick
to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do
these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of
shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even
experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to
the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And
socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to
confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading
of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological
leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down
for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of
constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship.
>don't surprised when people talk back.
Say "nigger" and people won't "talk" back. You might be killed.
>video of white pranksters dressed in KKK garment in black neighborhood
>forced to undress, get naked, be insulted, beaten
> As long as it isn't against the popular belief.
Christ how much of a faggot do you have to be?
Just because people have the right to say no to you doesn't make you oppressed you pussy.
It's hilarious how conservatives have developed this hippie-ish persecution complex because they perceived that *that* was the reason that "progressives" were winning, and not the fact that progressives were dominating academia and STEM sciences and generally becoming more educated and better critical thinkers than conservitard cultists.
Conservatives have spent the last 30 years giving handouts to their friends, attempting to wage a whiny childish "culture war" through stereotyping over talk radio, and attempting to justify the US as a Christian Theocracy.
Modern-day libertarians are even worse. It's a bunch of fucking neo-feudalists who oppose "collectivism" (which they don't even fucking understand) and sweat up and down that they and the plutocrats who bankroll their politics aren't out to make the plutocrats even more powerful than they already are.
If tolerating fags is all it takes for a government that actually listens to scientists and economists, that sounds like a no-brainer to me.
You're not offending me, I'm only telling you you're wrong because I dislike branding anyone who exhibits behaviour you do not agree with as insane. Also, people with personality disorders tend not to realize it themselves. I mean, the disorder is in the personality itself.
It looks to me like histrionic personality disorder, or maybe borderline, because he exhibits attention-seeking traits. He has a peculiar persecution complex where he claims to be a member of outlier groups to have a better claim on being an outsider. Thusfar he has claimed to be a homosexual, alcoholic, Muslim, and pedophile. He seems to be going with the latter in recent times, though he claims to have always been into kids. This might be true, but only recently has he started beating the pedocution drum.
He is also not my friend. Not anymore, at least. It's impossible to be close with people like this.
>Leftists are morons.
Yeah, I think we get it by now, thanks. No need to bash us over the head with it anymore, hombre.
I do agree with a big chunk of that, though. People who are hostile to the side that opposes them in this matters tend not to help their own cause. Why should people, after all, help someone who is attacking them? Makes no sense. On the other hand, if someone approached you with an offer that would be beneficial to both parties, you'd have to be a fool not to take it.
>I think if people would be accepting of, I dunno, someone who is more masculine or feminine than they "ought" to be for their gender, they should be accepted. So if that's the case when someone changed their gender, I don't see why anyone would care.
Everyone "accepts". No choice. What can you do? Nothing.
But don't ask me to even consider a trans "woman". I wouldn't date one, I wouldn't love one. Most people will tell you the same if they're honest. Nobody considers trans for life partners. Trans themselves don't want a tranny for a partner. They want a real man or a real woman.
Economically, I don't mind, that's a different problem.
Why is it a shame that I'm racist? Just as much as you were born feeling different, I was born racist. I dislike black people and don't want them around me or anyone I like. Facts of life only confirmed that natural instinct. Evolution works that way: you mate with what is more like yourself. That's how new species happen: similar individuals end up honing their species by associating for common genes.
I have no problem being friends with nignogs though. But as a group, I'm racist. I don't want them invading other countries and I want my race to endure as a race and not be mixed with everything all the time. Fairly normal sentiments.
>watch how blacks treat homos, in Africa, you might side with me
> emotion and not logic
Check this logic out.
Yeah, sounds a bit like histrionic PD, like you said. Again, sorry for overgeneralizing. You're absolutely right. It usually requires an extensive analysis of the person in question to determine whether or not they're mentally ill. I think I may have been trying to joke about the flamboyancy of LGBT pride parades, and possibly gave someone the wrong impression.
>Shit, you can even say this shit out in the open without being arrested. You are not oppressed, you special, little snowflake.
Fallacy. You can get seriously beaten for saying these things. Does that mean you're oppressed? I never said that. The reality is that if you say certain things, it can lead to you getting beaten up.
Stop squirming around like a faggot so much. It doesn't add to your credibility.
>You want to know my definition of "bigoted"? It's my personal fucking opinion,
You didn't give me your definition. Are you mentally retarded? If so, let me know, I'll be gentle.
>my entire point is to allow everyone the maximum amount of personal freedom
>pedophiles have feelings too!
You need to die, cunt.
You're not born racist. Racism is taught.
> That's how new species happen: similar individuals end up honing their species by associating for common genes.
That's one of many ways new (sub)species happen. Another way is when long-separated groups of subspecies mate.
The "I was born racist" argument is a pretty popular one for racists who believe that it's not "wrong" if they're not making a conscious decision to do it. The fact is that racism is a set of high-level habits that derives from your upbringing. You're just finding ways to justify it because you're too much of a pussy to take responsibility for your own beliefs.
It doesn't make evolutionary sense for a species to be selected based on a strict instinct of phenotypical detection. A lack of genetic diversity in an early population would make them easily wiped out by a genetically-selecting disease.
I mean, think about it, miscgenation used to be illegal, but people would do it anyway. Do you really believe that "liberalism" socialized people to fuck outside their race? Do you really believe that there has to be an agenda to encourage unrelated humans to fuck?
I don't give a shit that you're racist, but stop trying to justify it as "natural". It's the same ignorant pseudoscience that the rest of your conservitard demigods vomit while calling "liberals" idiots.
It's a fact the Orthodox church pushed the bill, and they do it with the same "family values" argument the church in the US uses. This line of reasoning reminds me of NeoNazi's and Muslims talking about the Holocaust. You like Christianity, you don't like gay marriage and LGBT people, but you're acting like it's some sort of insult to suggest Christianity might have something to do with anti-LGBT laws. I don't get it.
And I've never even heard about LGBT activists storming churches in America, and that sounds like a bunch of Muhammed-Cartoon level bullshit and propaganda. I would also bet it has more to do with shitty American culture than sexuality, given that the same plain doesn't happen in Europe.
>that's not an argument
Oh, well, that's easy! There is ample evidence across multiple sciences that LGBT issues are simply a part of the human species, and have been around for forever. But hey, that's not an argument, according to you, so you're free to ignore it in favour of your conspiracy bullshit.
I agree that lack of authority is shitting Europe up, though. But LGBT has nothing to do with cultural marxism and multiculturalism. The left has all but dropped the LGBT crowd in favour of immigrants.
You're conflating threats. The left has been a traditional supporter of LGBT rights, but also of cultural marxism. The left is your enemy, LGBT people aren't. You'll find that there are many gays and transgenders who support right wing politics.
>And you're trying to claim that a man will always be a man and viceversa. There's no scientific basis for that opinion.
DNA. That's as scientific as it gets. Genetically, your sex can't change, period.
I dismissed the rest of your comment because of your Creationism.
Er... can't really see the part where I'm a creationist, but sure, whatever floats your boat, man. I was talking about mentality rather than physical characteristics, but hey, what do I know? I've only been studying psychiatry for three years.
99% of the earths population cannot be considered adults or responsible for their own actions, including you.
So just let whatever happens happen, there is no enlightened alternative when everyone is living in the dark. Just stay out of the way of the madness, and tend to your own agenda. If you try to help them, they will kill you, or ridicule you at minimum, but you will most likely be killed if you try to upset the status quo. History repeatedly proves this.
>Isn't it a good thing? Children are growing up in orphanages in dire circumstances is preferable to being raised by two men or two women?
I'd sooner grow up in an orphanage with lots of bros and sisters than be raised by two men. One of them wouldn't be my father and the idea that he fucks my dad's ass in the night is enough torture to prefer an orphanage. Sorry.
As to your study, I have studies which say the exact opposite.
>I don't understand the first amendment and that makes me angry!
You're allowed to do all of those. People are just going to recognize that you're fucking retarded for it. The First Amendment only means that the GOVERNMENT can't restrict your speech.
Let's see, psychiatry is the profession where the most people commit suicide (the psychiatrists, not the patients), people generally study psychiatry and psychology because they believe they can fix themselves, and there is no present medication or practice that has been shown to create any objective relief from mental disease, all we have observed so far is temporary alleviation of symptoms.
So what do you know? Evidently you know very little, and you likely have one or more mental diseases.
> The reality is that if you say certain things, it can lead to you getting beaten up.
BAWWWWWWWW I CAN'T YELL FIRE IN A CROWDED THEATER
How much of a childish babby faggot do you have to be to feel entitled to call someone a "nigger" and then hide behind "free speech"? You're like these youtube "pranksters" who steal someone's phone and yell "it's a prank it's a prank!" while getting their teeth knocked in.
Here's the difference: You can stop acting like an asshole. They can't stop being gay or black.
>You mention weakening networks, but we're not primal apes destined for simply reproducing anymore.
What? I specified what networks I meant:
- social class
This isn't about "simply reproducing".
No, we're not. Third world countries are, but we aren't. Most of our nations have less than 2 kids for two adults, meaning we're dying off. Guess what, homos thrive in our nations while they're reprimanded in countries that are overpopulated. That argument makes no sense whatsoever.
Europe needs MORE babies, not less. Japan needs MORE babies, not less. America fares better, but still, at the rate this is going, we're dying down.
Sidenote: people have always lived roughly the same age. What makes the difference is how many of these died in infancy and how many diseases one can cure. There's nothing wrong with humans existing.
>homos are OK but fuck people, they need to die and reproduce less
I don't get you.
>Just because people have the right to say no to you doesn't make you oppressed you pussy.
He never said he was oppressed. You're a manipulative cunt. All your posts are now ignored.
The left is definitely driven by emotion. I consider one of the most damaging changes in Western society to be the legitimisation of the Appeal to Emotion logical fallacy in politics. This coincided with the rise of the Left, and has since been incorporated as a core value for Leftists, even when it was not previously. Look at Leftist arguments before the 60's, and they tend to be relatively logical.
What's worse is that the right is also entering into the emotional debate. This thread alone is evidence enough. We are living in a culture of offense, and everyone is trying to be the biggest baby because that affords them the most rights.
The appeal to emotion should be illegal in politics. I mean that 100%. How many policies have been enacted because opposing them would get you branded as "inhuman" rather than on sound logic? National politics need to reflect the national interest. Any arguing on emotional grounds is bunk. Political decisions should benefit the people of the nation, not serve some shitty, personal ideology.
>Is there a name for LGBT people and multicultists?
>I think they're part of the same general movement, but I don't know of a name to highlight the fact that they're the same problem.
>I do believe they're steering societies in the wrong direction.
>They falsely believe that their "progress" makes things better, when in reality, we're just living off the leftovers from much more conservative times.
>There is no support for this way of life, we're simply walking farther and farther off our pillars, and at some point, whatever we're walking on will break.
Pandering to special interest groups is profitable and can sway voters, thus more profit. This will continue as long as the money and attention rolls in.
>I will personally remain civil during this thread.
>I welcome opposition as long as you have ideas and arguments and don't attack me personally, as I won't attack you personally.
Like I give a fuck what a faggot thinks.
>This thread is about ideas and a person having different ideas shouldn't be hated for it, at least not in this thread.
Looks like another excuse for attention whoring and special rights for the mentally ill.
>If you're up for it, so am I.
Are you really getting an erection from this? What the fuck, is "trolling fetish" a thing now?
>transgendered people pushing for "xir" and "xe" pronouns
Oh fuck no. Fuck these fucking snowflakes. They can also shove "cis" right up their gay ass. There is no reason for fucking queerbaits to make up new words for "normal."
That's not rightwing logic, faggot, that's what you were told by certain people before they fucked your ass. Obama's bullshit is the same serenade before he fucked your ass with his white cock.