Bvanevery's reaction to Bronto and Sinny [Transgender] derail split from "Proof that women are becom

[TBerg]

So what were your thoughts on the video(s)?

I see that a lot of transitions are quite real in their positive impact upon the people undergoing them.

The reality of the transitions also undermines absolutely anyone's claim of gender parity, if they support transgenderism, in terms of ability and instinct. It means that femininity is anchored to being female and masculinity is anchored to being male. "Maleness" and "femaleness" would be determined by a preponderance of genotypical material that should be indicated by phenotypical behavior and instinct. These former boys were just waiting to express their natures more fully.

It should also be noted that these former boys also found it easier to live in society as ladies than men. Gender expectations worked in favor of their natures after transitioning, meaning that notions of "male privilege" become destabilized and negated as dogma. It must mean something that there are differences among our experiences of gender that cannot be neatly delineated in the tradition of Social Justice, particularly when it is used against those whom they deem as the oppressive enemy in a cultural dialectic.

Their mere existence, compounded by the excellent characters of these specific individuals, dispenses with the conceit that stifles conversation about Human Biodiversity.

 

[Hadoblado]

Sinny that's enough.

Demonstration 1:
Me: 'You are a stinking retard'.
You: *outrage*
Me: 'I didn't say that that was my opinion, it's just something I can say so I did'.

Demonstration 2:
Me: 'I think you're a stinking retard'.
You: *outrage*
Me: 'Oh I may think that but it's not necessarily true. I didn't say you actually were one, just that that's what I think'.

If you're talking speculatively and there's a chance you can offend people, you need to be clear that it's speculation.

If you're talking about your actual opinion and it could offend people, be clear on that too, and expect correction.

If you really intend on discussing something controversial, you can put in some effort to be respectful about it. Prefacing your tirade with "I'm sorry" makes it no less a tirade. Look at this:

Like crikey man - some people are born missing arms and legs and you want boo-hoo and piss and moan onabout that God/Nature/The Universe entrusted on you the 'wrong' FULL BODY PARTS

I was raised with the notion 'you get what you're given, like it or lump it'.

I'm all for gay rights - But I don't believe in messing with nature [on a fundamental level], sacred shit's encoded in us. I personally believe that transgenders and the such are obviously more interested in their own gratification, than anything else on the planet.

You just told at least one person on this forum that you think them precious self-involved hedonists, and your phrasing was rhetorical (playing up the issue). That's not how someone acts if they're actually concerned for the well-being of others.

Furthermore, your opinion is not sacred, especially when it's poorly informed. When you push your insensitive and uninformed opinion in a sensitive and complex discussion, are you at all surprised when things get heated? If it's just your opinion, and you're open to information, why is the tone of your opinion so forceful?

I doubt this counts as bullying. I'm sharing my opinion. If others don't like it - then that's their problem. (See how we are straightening out's everybody's problems)

I agree, it's not bullying (at least not at a conscious level). And it is also other people's problem. Two for two. But the way that problem will be solved is by having you adjust yourself in such a fashion as to create less problems for other people.

It's not to your credit that you escalated to a rhythm of repeated name calling. You directly called or alluded to CC being a bitch five times. CC is a tough lad who can chin it, but repetition does not make it funnier, and in future it will not be tolerated. This is bullying. The only reason why I'm not handing you a temp right now is that CC was on the other end and they have a habit of bringing out the worst in the opposition. This is a warning, next time bans are on the table.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

I think that we should cook marshmallows with the heat generated in this thread. ^_^

 

[The Gopher]

I think that we should cook marshmallows with the heat generated in this thread. ^_^

I heard roast Gopher tastes nice.

 

[Sinny91]

Sinny that's enough.

Demonstration 1:
Me: 'You are a stinking retard'.
You: *outrage*
Me: 'I didn't say that that was my opinion, it's just something I can say so I did'.

Mm, I clarified that that was my opinion at the time.

Demonstration 2:
Me: 'I think you're a stinking retard'.
You: *outrage*
Me: 'Oh I may think that but it's not necessarily true. I didn't say you actually were one, just that that's what I think'.

Whats wrong with this?

If you're talking speculatively and there's a chance you can offend people, you need to be clear that it's speculation.

I made that clear.

If you're talking about your actual opinion and it could offend people, be clear on that too, and expect correction.

I made that clear, and I've also been very compliant in taking correction, bar from Cherry of course.

If you really intend on discussing something controversial, you can put in some effort to be respectful about it.

I did put in an effort, a couple of people just had to go OTT.

Prefacing your tirade with "I'm sorry" makes it no less a tirade.

I think the double standards presented here are ridiculous. Racism? fine, Islamaphobia? fine, Bible bashing? fine, Someone's opinion on transvestites? Call the PC police. (lets face it, only cuz Cherry had to go onn, an on, an on, otherwise this would have slipped under the radar)

Look at this:

You just told at least one person on this forum that you think them precious self-involved hedonists

That's been taken out of context and falsely attributed. Sheesh, if the Mods here won't play fair, then I give up.

and your phrasing was rhetorical (playing up the issue). That's not how someone acts if they're actually concerned for the well-being of others.

And look at all this rhetoric in return... mmm mumble grumble..

Furthermore, your opinion is not sacred

Never said it was.

especially when it's poorly informed. When you push your insensitive and uninformed opinion in a sensitive and complex discussion, are you at all surprised when things get heated?

Didn't really express surprise, just disdain.

If it's just your opinion, and you're open to information, why is the tone of your opinion so forceful?

Oh I'm the forceful one here?? lolol hark!

I agree, it's not bullying (at least not at a conscious level). And it is also other people's problem.


Two for two. But the way that problem will be solved is by having you adjust yourself in such a fashion as to create less problems for other people.

Furthermore from post 12, I took the time to rationally, and NONE SENSATIONALLY PRESENT MY VIEW. I posted a recap not long ago , perhaps you should have another look.

It's not to your credit that you escalated to a rhythm of repeated name calling
You directly called or alluded to CC being a bitch five times. CC is a tough lad who can chin it, but repetition does not make it funnier, and in future it will not be tolerated. This is bullying.

Sorry, the concept of Cherry being a little bitch is a notion that's stuck on repeat in my head. It expresses it's self as almost a mild form of tourrets at the end of any thought involving Cherry. Almost involuntary. I'll be sure to try not to do that again.

The only reason why I'm not handing you a temp right now is that CC was on the other end and they have a habit of bringing out the worst in the opposition. This is a warning, next time bans are on the table.

I think you are over-reacting too , but hey, what I think obviously doesn't matter here. I'm happy to move on. All this drama expressed over one opinion, centered on thoughts which I only briefly entertained... I've clarified my position, intent and motivations several times in plain English, and I stand accused of escalation?

I'm clearly insane; but I can live with that -beats the alternative.

 

[TBerg]

I actually think Sinny is a little misunderstood in this thread, and you know that I of all people have high sensitivity to her nonsense. I think a lot of it is that you guys are extrapolating from past experience from her. You guys can take what I say or you can reject it. Just my pittance of an input.

 

[Sinny91]

I appreciate that Tberg - even though I think you are guilty of that your self (at other time's), I appreciate it.

 

[The Gopher]

To be real for a second I actually agree with Tberg (although not with the same subconscious motivation) and again with the mini disclaimer I've been annoyed with Sinny's "style" in the past but think this is a massive improvement. (Hmm does that come across as a backhanded compliment? Ehh oh well)

While I don't agree with the way it was done particularly I don't think it's a big deal. Some people have specifically gone out of their way to post one comment saying "Ahh but sinny's been bad in the past!" which causes confirmation bias in those watching and is not helpful unless you specifically want to turn people against someone. Now I would never stoop to such manipulative ways!

Basically y'all being played by preconception and manipulative people. The one thing I like about Sinny is she's far to stupid to manipulate anyone (I mean that as a complement, aka you shoot straight it's just more amusing said the other way and increases the strength of my argument with those that dislike you.) so she has no social defense against it. Obviously Sinny is the victim here and I must work hard to undermine those attacking her! (okay now I've totally lost the plot)

 

[Sinny91]

You have a strange way with words Goph..

But much love <3

(I have actually been trying to amend my style of interaction, glad it didn't go completely unnoticed)

 

[Lot]

So much butt hurt in this thread. Ya'll meed to take a chill pill.

It's funny how cherry starts a fight, a mod corrects him, then everyone picks on the victim of cherry's assault. If there was any sense cherry and sinny would be temp banned and this shit show of a thread would be closed.

You aren't getting anywhere with sinny, but you self righteous warriors of the trans are valiantly fighting to push your agenda.

I'm out. You guys have fun acting like a smutty daytime talkshow.

Spoiler

https://youtu.be/wNYsNC7jMjc

 

[Sinny91]

If there was any sense cherry and sinny would be temp banned and this shit show of a thread would be closed.

Lets not be rash, we're already in Oubliette

 

[crippli]

I think the double standards presented here are ridiculous. Racism? fine, Islamaphobia? fine, Bible bashing? fine, Someone's opinion on transvestites? Call the PC police. (lets face it, only cuz Cherry had to go onn, an on, an on, otherwise this would have slipped under the radar)

What does transvestites have to do with wasting a surgeons golden time?

Transvestism (also called transvestitism) is the practice of dressing and acting in a style or manner traditionally associated with the other sex.

 

[Black Rose]

Transvestite
Transsexual
Transgender

Not synonymous

 

[Sinny91]

Oh yea. I'll have to correct that Anime.

 

[crippli]

Transvestite
Transsexual
Transgender

Not synonymous

I'm just wondering at what level people are indulging in information these days. It's like discussing engineering. And people shime in with thinking nurses and babysitters are synonymous with an engineer. Not sure what kind of reaction one should have. But I certainly think it odd. Doubly so if they will stick to it claiming they have a right to say and mean what they want. Like what does that have to do with anything. One will still be wrong.

 

[Yellow]

This digression hits on a fairly complicated matter. One would assume that in an "INTP forum", our members would appreciate battles of wit, reason, and logic. The reality is that we have a wide diversity of personalities, given subject knowledge, view points, and tolerance for theory. Variety being the spice of life, this isn't really a negative quality.

Nevertheless, when one member has a low tolerance for detached debate, a volatile personality, and/or known triggers, who's to blame for repeated incidents?

I realize that ultimately, we are all responsible for our own actions. If someone quickly descends into name-calling/personal attacks, they clearly chose to do so. But if a person with a comparatively higher aptitude for self-control is continuing to engage, further exacerbating the situation, are they really blameless?

It would be like getting into sword fight knowing your opponent only has bit of wood in his/her hand. Sure, if your opponent prattles on and on about the strength of their "sword", it doesn't hurt to give them a quick whack and send them on their way. Delusions, fallacies, and other weaknesses should be addressed for everyone's sake. However, to prolong the fight -- toying with your opponent -- is shameful (the guilt falling on both parties, but unevenly).

Then, of course, you get into the squishy grey area of, "how do you know?"

How do we know the level of deliberation exacted by each opponent? Perhaps CC used some keen skills of manipulation to orchestrate the breakdown in discussion. Then again, maybe CC's reaction was personal, completely genuine, and devoid of calculation. Perhaps Sinny was being incredibly aggressive, with no regard for discourse. Then again, maybe Sinny was completely misunderstood and expressing her frustration by shutting down.

Throw in personal regard for both parties (which in my case is positive on both counts), and you have a big, uncomfortable/irritating/entertaining mess. I don't envy the mods in these cases (nor any bystanders, for that matter).

 

[Cherry Cola]

So much butt hurt in this thread. Ya'll meed to take a chill pill.

It's funny how cherry starts a fight, a mod corrects him, then everyone picks on the victim of cherry's assault. If there was any sense cherry and sinny would be temp banned and this shit show of a thread would be closed.

You aren't getting anywhere with sinny, but you self righteous warriors of the trans are valiantly fighting to push your agenda.

I'm out. You guys have fun acting like a smutty daytime talkshow.

Spoiler

https://youtu.be/wNYsNC7jMjc

No, if there was any sense a moderator would've stepped in long before I did . I didn't start a fight, Sinny did. If I walked out on the street and started yelling SIEG HEIL at the top of my lungs and someone walked up and punched me in the face then would that person be counted as the cause of said altercation?

Nobody's pushing any agenda by asking for basic decency, and where's the self righteousness btw? If you didn't think post 12 was fucked up then I don't know what I'm supposed to say, obviously you need to have some RL encounters with actual trans people before you're able to get the issue, which is kind of sad in how telling it is of the limits of human empathy.

Oh wait I forgot you're actually not interested in discussing anything because me and Sinny are both acting like a smutty daytime talkshow but you still felt the need to participate in said talk show why exactly?

On the other hand I applaud your idea of banning both me and Sinny. Then I can go transheaven having died a martyr.

 

[Sinny91]

Actually, I have encountered and interacted with a number of trans people...
(A cousin of mine has a big foot in the door of the rainbow community) I've just had a realisation.. Got there all my own - I sharn't bother sharing.

 

[TBerg]

I really don't understand what's so hard about accepting that people are entitled to shitty and ignorant opinions. Without that baseline, better opinions become more timid in their development.

 

[Sinny91]

I really don't understand what's so hard about accepting that people are entitled to shitty and ignorant opinions. Without that baseline, better opinions become more timid in their development.

I'm warming up to you

Spoiler

Spoiler

Pull your self together to Sinny!

 

[Cherry Cola]

I really don't understand what's so hard about accepting that people are entitled to shitty and ignorant opinions. Without that baseline, better opinions become more timid in their development.

In principle I agree. But on a forum a certain line should be drawn at some point. If post 12 is okay, then subsequently its also okay to say black peoples are monkeys, homosexuals should be locked up, jews should be banished etc, I don't think that facilitates the development of better ideas, because there's gonna be a lot of input missed out on.

And, afaik it's not okay. Gregory got banned. This was on the same level as that. It just didn't go on for as long.

Stuff having to with transsexuality has been discussed before, and it's not like you have to be politically correct about it on here either. For instance one discussion was about whether or not transsexuality should be called a mental illness or not, ergo if it is a pathological condition, and that went fine iirc.

 

[Sinny91]

Cept Doc Greg was guilty of attempting to incite hate - and I didn't incite nuffin part from your stupid feelinz.

Your morals and logic are as equally questionable as mine.

The only person who stopped this discussion from going down 'fine' was you.

I lack the energy and conviction to accurately convey my disdain for you.

You accomplished your goal, you drew saurons gaze upon my presence.

Watevz - my feels are fine. Enjoy your anguish.

 

[Cherry Cola]

You not being aware of what you are doing does not mean you do not do. You were inciting hate (how can you deny this lol?). And this is an issue with you in general, you think your intentions are all that matter when they are not. That's not how communication works.

 

[Sinny91]

I disagree.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Whats wrong with this?

Person A insults person B, then person A downplays the insult by saying it's their opinion and not necessarily a fact. (situational absurd ensues)

I think the double standards presented here are ridiculous. Racism? fine, Islamaphobia? fine, Bible bashing? fine, Someone's opinion on transvestites? Call the PC police. (lets face it, only cuz Cherry had to go onn, an on, an on, otherwise this would have slipped under the radar)

What you say is provably false, if anything you've gone yourself on a transsexual bashing streak and you'd want it to go unnoticed? Your double standard defence doesn't hold up. Additionally calling something political correctness is not a valid rebuttal of a criticism, one has to present actual arguments against it. There are many valid reasons why something causes a negative reaction or criticism, many of which coincide with what is popularly considered a "politically correct" thinking.
PC in and of itself isn't automatically false, one has to carefully weight what instance and what claim is being made with it to judge its validity.

If anything, using sweeping generalisations such as PC to dismiss what others say or do shows lack of understanding or lack of motivation for building said understanding.

That's been taken out of context and falsely attributed. Sheesh, if the Mods here won't play fair, then I give up.

No, it hasn't. It is a large 3 paragraph quote that shows your harmful behaviour which you are trying to deny. If there was anything taken out of context there, you could easily point it out instead of mentioning we aren't playing fair. Since you couldn't prove what you were about to say, you chose to accuse mods of unfairness to back it up.

Never said it was.

You've said something to the effect of that. You were expecting everyone to respect what you've said and leave you alone just because you are free to express your views.

Sorry, the concept of Cherry being a little bitch is a notion that's stuck on repeat in my head. It expresses it's self as almost a mild form of tourrets at the end of any thought involving Cherry. Almost involuntary. I'll be sure to try not to do that again.

I'm afraid we are not tolerant of you playing around this issue. After Hado seriously telling you it was a terrible idea and something you should stop your attempt to turn it into a joke just fails spectacularly and I'd go to say that it's downright vicious to evade responsibility like that.

This brazen attempt at joking and avoiding responsibility earns you a temp ban.


Here's a reply you can chew on after you return from the temp ban, one thing to note, we tried to explain the issue so that you may understand, the nature of the crime was already well defined and not a subject of debate. Mods aren't responsible for convincing the offenders of their crimes and we've certainly done more than enough to elucidate the problem, the rest is up to all of you.

Thread closed.

 

[Hadoblado]

I know it's rude to post in locked threads, but I need to add to that conclusion:

Sinny's ban is Sinny's cross to bare. The case for CC is a different question. Having not really understood the outcry I investigated and had a member hold my hand through the position, and I agree, CC baited Sinny. The area is murky as Yellow illustrated, but I will make it clear now. If CC is deemed to have baited someone again they will be sharing the sentence, it is up to them to be sure they don't reopen a closed drama in the future.