Fitz,What on earth are you talking about. You are off your nut pal.
Printable View
Fitz,What on earth are you talking about. You are off your nut pal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001
So after complaining about Liberals refusing to engage in discussion, you now refuse to engage with any argument others have made and retreat behind this tired line?Quote:
Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001
The basic point is that you made an assertion that Dylan Mulvaney is being forced down peoples' throats, which you are obviously unable to back up. Without that your entire argument falls apart.
Your claimed sympathy for transsexuals seems dubious, given your posting history is full of negative comments about them. Do you even like or respect them as people, as opposed to sexual objects?
The world according to mildcigar:
A trans person was involved in some niche marketing that few people would have seen
= Trans are being forced down peoples' throats
Some transphobes brought it to my attention by making a big deal about nothing = Trans are being forced down peoples' throats
Some businesses recognise that trans people exist = Businesses are pursuing a woke agenda
Trans people demand rights = Trans are going too far and causing a backlash
Trans people refuse to stay invisible = Trans are going too far and causing a backlash
Right-wing transphobes target trans for political reasons = See, I told you there would be a backlash
Some liberals disagreed with my dubious arguments = Liberals are intolerant of other points of view
I ran away from a debate because I had no good counterarguments = Liberals refuse to debate
Analogy. It wasn't subtle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Imatwork
Not being able to refer to trans people as "he" is also clearly communism. But wanting to prevent a trans person from doing promos on their own social media pages is definitely nothing like communism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo
As far I can tell, that's the only place these promos appeared originally. So what these cretins are really saying is that they don't want a trans person to be forced down their throats if they happen to visit that trans person's social media pages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
I think I have general sympathy for transsexuals as a group.
I assume that having gender dysphoria is a hard row to hoe.
I think the opinions expressed by me in this forum and in public for that matter generally support the best interests of transsexual community. I'm sure a good number of my opinions go against the current trans orthodoxy, but that doesn't make me wrong or a hater of transsexuals.
The Trans community and its supporters need to think in terms of long term goals rather than short term victories (as do we all).
For example it makes little sense to me for public libraries to host drag queen story hours (we probably shouldn't be promoting overtly sexual entertainment to young children). This very easily leads to charges of grooming. I could care less if adult males want to dress up as women (I assume most of us can admit there is a sexual element at play with this behavior). Nothing particularly wrong with the behavior of crossdressing itself, but it is wrong to put minors into the mix.
In this forum I have expressed the opinion that MTF transsexuals should not compete in sports against biological woman, and predicted that there would be a backlash against the transsexual community as a whole because of the push to include MTF in women's sports.
I think it is patently obvious that Lia Thomas should never have been allowed to compete against genetic women in the NCAA (if anyone has any doubt relook at Lia on the victory stand towering over her competitors). As far as MTFs in sports there are few good options other than having a MTF division (which based on the relatively small number of trans athletes would most likely be cost prohibitive). Is this completely fair to Lia? Probably not, but it would be the fairest thing to do for the greatest number of people.
The reason I bring this example up is that ongoing backlash against trans athletes will have a negative impact on the trans community as a whole (even those who don't have an athletic bone in their body). Some people can argue against my reasoning, but I think I am giving sound long term advice that would help the trans community rather than hurt it.
This leads me to Dylan Mulvaney. I really do believe when corporations (when controlled by woke leadership) advertise with someone like Dylan it is for shock value only, and I and others perceive this as having Dylan forced down our collective throats. When you have an advertising campaign that in this case has very little to do with selling beer then something is rotten in Denmark.
As a corporation why would you do something that actively hurts your brand (it would lead some to believe that the advertising is for pure ideological purposes to push the radical trans agenda)? Why do advertising that causes you to lose customers? I have not run a Fortune 500 company, but I have run a small business in the distant past, and I never in my advertising was even tempted to get involved in one side or the other on a hot button political issue (it would merely be a way to piss off potential customers that believe whatever the other side of the issue is the correct one).
What advertising campaign? Where did your see it? I far as I can tell, she only appeared on her own social media page after responding to a general invitation from Bud Light. This is what it says in the article I posted earlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001
"In early April, Bud Light sent an influencer named Dylan Mulvaney a handful of beers. Mulvaney, in turn, posted a video of herself dressed like Holly Golightly from Breakfast at Tiffany’s, using said beers to celebrate both March Madness and her first year of womanhood. One of the cans featured her image. It was part of a paid sponsorship deal and promotion for some sort of sweepstakes challenge where people can win $15,000 from Bud Light by sending in videos of themselves carrying a lot of beers."
This hardly amounts to featuring in a national advertising campaign. Have you never heard of niche advertising? LGBT people drink beer too.
You and your transphobe friends seem to be upset by the idea that a trans person would be used anywhere in any limited way. It really doesn't say much for you that you reflexively go along with this ridiculous beat up, and the fact that you also chose to make gratuitous negative comments about Dylan is also revealing.
Here are four simple questions that I think are a good test of whether you are really sympathetic to trans people:
1. Do you think trans people are entitled to general protection against discrimination in employment, access to services, etc (leaving aside particular cases like female sports or female prisons)?
2. Should trans peoples' gender identification be respected in how they are referred to?
3. Do you think trans people should have the same rights to participate in public life as anyone else?
4. If any of your friends, family or workmates made blatantly transphobic comments would you raise any objection?
I know that people can have different views on things like female sports without necessarily being transphobic, but if you can't answer yes to these questions then I can't see how you can possibly be sympathetic to trans.
I know you want to present anyone who disagrees with you as a slave to some liberal trans rights orthodoxy, but that is not so. Here's what I said in another thread.
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...ication-easier
You are just totally wrong-headed on this issue. You read about this, saw 'woke agenda', went into knee-jerk response mode, and didn't even bother to check basic facts. Whatever sympathy towards trans you might have, it is clearly subservient to your political allegiances.Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
Generally, I think trans people are deserving of the same rights and privileges as anyone else.If someone wants me to refer to them as a particular gender I try to respect that. However the "they, them" crap is pushing it, and I'm probably not going to take that seriously.In my day to day life, I don't think I ever see someone I know going out of their way to be mean or disrespectful to a trans person (or anyone else for that matter). If I think someone's language is out of line, I would say something. I live in the Midwest, and other than some rare crazy people (such as the Westboro Baptist Church) most of us try to live our own lives and leave people alone to live their best life.Where I do hear people make comments recently is about transgender folks in women's sports, or the recent Riley Gaines situation at SF State, and how shouting down and assaulting someone is a poor way to have a discussion in a democracy. However these are transitory comments over the news of the day.The other recent front here in the Midwest is legislation (which I think is needed) restricting sex change therapy for minors. I'm sure this will be seen as a transphobic comment, but I don't think minors are mature enough to able to make those type of decisions until later in life. There also seems to be a good amount of Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy going on with the parents of some of the gender nonconforming minors. I think a good example of going too far too fast in the case of a minor is the case of Jazz Jennings. If I had a child in a similar situation, the last place I would have them work out their life would be in front of the world on The Learning Channel. I think Jazz would have been a lot happier at this point if there had not been a rush to medically and surgically transition her at a very young age.
I notice that you complained previously about some trans people trying to cancel JK Rowling (yet another canary in that coal mine).
What is the difference between these cases? Why is it unacceptable for some people to try to cancel JK Rowling because they don't like her views on trans, but perfectly okay for others to try to cancel Anheuser-Busch because they object to even limited use of a trans person in marketing?Quote:
Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001
For the record, no I don't think JK Rowling should be cancelled, and I do think some trans activists go too far.
Also, why do you continually play up the role of fringe trans activists while downplaying the role of transphobes on your own side?
I notice you continue to be evasive on the question of how exactly Dylan Mulvaney was forced down people's throats. Resorting to words like 'perceived' is a circular justification if the perception is just something manufactured by a right-wing beat-up.