Norm... Gay... Straight... Trans...

QP! said:
Ya if someone tells me to prove this forum is based on partisan arguments, i am not doing that either. Those are just games to deny the obvious.


And i have been in all sorts of arguments here where people have tried to define the purpose as procreation. That not being a person who can procreate or in a relationship that is for procreation is wrong. When we throw out infertile couples who want to have a child but cannot they mostly give them a pass as they 'want' and 'try'.

Again i am not going to prove those discussions exist as they are so common here you are trolling to pretend they do not.


In the history of issues that people and groups deal with trying to push the view that either the issues are the "exact same or they don't count" is never a winning argument.

No one is claiming they are same. But the discrimination and demonization that resulted is pretty near identical.


And yet very similar arguments were leveled at gays. Some claim they are fake gay and do it for attention or other reasons and should just stop being gay. Some claim they need to convert. Some used to claim having gays in change room with straight people was a violation of the hetero persons rights.
Click to expand...
Obvious like a man isnt actually a woman no matter what he thinks and even if he lops off his penis?
 
AProudLefty said:
Who claimed that they are real biological women?

The real transwomen know their biological sex.

Going back to my post... There are fake transwomen.
Click to expand...
Then they dont need the bathroom used by actual women or need to compete against actual woman

If they do then they're playing pretend.
 
QP! said:
I wrote this in another thread where it is a bit of a derail so i will post it here for those who do not mind a longer read as the misunderstanding of what is 'normal' in a society and what is not has always been a bit of pet peeve of mine as to how people mislabel or misunderstand it.
.
.
.
What many people DO NOT understand is the concept of the NORM.

The norm is not only where the bulk of the population exists (heterosexual) but that norm ALSO includes a host of minority populations from that majority within the norm, that evolve naturally (gay and trans, etc).

They are all NORMAL while one is majoritarian norm and the other minority norm.

Variants in the norm are evolutionary responses to always test the majoritarian population but also to provide minority populations who might think and do things differently that ends up benefitting the majority population.

I am an example of a minority population, that are extreme risk takers. I have done almost every activity many normal people would never do and i embrace the risk as long as i do not see it as gratuitous risk by my standards.

Without that population of mostly young males, who embraced risk, embraced going on adventures, while not embracing, at an early age, the more normal path of marrying and settling down, much of the modern world would never have been discovered. For young men hoping on a ship and heading out into the middle of nowhere, not knowing if they fall off the edge of the planet (flat earth, etc) was not in the norm.

Brain science has shown that same chasing of risk is now tied most closely to entrepreneurs. Brain science has shown there is a percent of people, mostly young males, who struggle to 'feel' swings in happiness, exhilaration, joy, as others do unless they take risks.

These risk takes (often who die younger) were of great benefit to the 'norm', 'married young family type', who did not want that risk but wanted the job the risk took to build the company.
Click to expand...
Islam 100%. Why just this morning I planned 2 terrorist attacks while shoving a gay person off a building.

Praise Allahhhh!
 
Yakuda said:
Whats funny is you idiots think radical islamists are your buddies that how fucking retarded you are
Click to expand...
Yeah, I party with terrorists alllll the time, trumptard! You'll have to excuse me now I have to plan a terrorist attack and it's time for my evening prayer.

You paranoid mofo's crack me up!
 
QP! said:
It is not childish. You just need to be less stupid.
Click to expand...
I was intentionally careful throughout this exchange not to put words in your mouth. I quoted you, separated your descriptive claim from your normative conclusion, and repeatedly clarified exactly what I was challenging.

And after all of that, you come back with this childish bullshit.

Good riddance.
 
zymurgy said:
I was intentionally careful throughout this exchange not to put words in your mouth.
Click to expand...
And yet you did. Even after i clarified your mistake you continued to push it as a strawman.

zymurgy said:
I quoted you, separated your descriptive claim from your normative conclusion, and repeatedly clarified exactly what I was challenging.
Click to expand...
And yet you were incorrect and REFUSE to understand the point i was making while pushing your strawman.

This post by you is a strawman and i have explained why and you have even conceded it and yet you keep pushing it...

"..You said it is “WRONG” to judge something negatively when it falls within biological/evolutionary variation. I pointed out that the biological fact of variation does not, by itself, establish that normative conclusion...."

So AGAIN. You here are speaking to the second level issue. i am speaking to the top level one. The top level where my use of WRONG applies is that the 'variation should be EXPECTED to exist'. That is a full stop statement from me and my ENTIRE point.

You have replied to that acknowledging as a 'duh' moment saying basically 'ya of course that is correct and obvious if you are referring to that part alone' WHICH IS WAS, while you then go on to push that i was not while arguing against your strawman points, many of which i said i agree largely with but were NOT what i was discussing.

zymurgy said:
And after all of that, you come back with this childish bullshit.

Good riddance.
Click to expand...
The childish bullshit is yours.

You are incapable of ACCEPTING a correction once you wrongly jump to a conclusion, stuff a strawman and then have it explained to you what you misread. Instead, due to inability to own a mistake you bend yourself in knots to try and keep your strawman as the issue so you can not admit wrong.

I guarantee you do this in real life and few people can stand dealing with you, because you refuse to accept clarifications from the person telling you what they said and meant and instead you keep insisting on your comprehension of it, even when it was wrong.

You were wrong. Again.
 
QP! said:
I am just curious so do not take this question as aggressive.

Do you understand how evolution works and how mankind has progressed over time or are you of the Adam and Eve camp because depending on which will inform how we can address my next question?

Q : As mankind progressed via evolution and it was changing genetics and newly evolved traits that brought us to where we are today from a much more primitive past, do you accept that much of what occurred to get us here was due to "genetic flaws" that became 'tested', persevered via superior adaption and eventually became the new core base of genetics that began to be passed on?

Meaning that it is normal (within the norm) for anomalies to present and get tested. Some succeed and become dominant and the core if what then is considered 'normal', and others can fail, subside or just remain more niche (gay) but all of that happening is within the NORM of how humanity works and evolution works. it never just settles on the current majoritarian genetics and traits and there is always a push to test anomalies to test against that.
Click to expand...
I believe in evolution, not "intelligent design." I am a secular person. My position on the issue is not based on faith.
At the same time, I'm no expert in the science, either.
It's simply what I believe to be true, based on logic and what the species needs to endure, knowing full well that reasonable people can disagree.

In no way do I take your disagreement to be aggressive, but thank you for clarifying that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QP!
QP! said:
I wrote this in another thread where it is a bit of a derail so i will post it here for those who do not mind a longer read as the misunderstanding of what is 'normal' in a society and what is not has always been a bit of pet peeve of mine as to how people mislabel or misunderstand it.
.
.
.
What many people DO NOT understand is the concept of the NORM.

The norm is not only where the bulk of the population exists (heterosexual) but that norm ALSO includes a host of minority populations from that majority within the norm, that evolve naturally (gay and trans, etc).

They are all NORMAL while one is majoritarian norm and the other minority norm.

Variants in the norm are evolutionary responses to always test the majoritarian population but also to provide minority populations who might think and do things differently that ends up benefitting the majority population.

I am an example of a minority population, that are extreme risk takers. I have done almost every activity many normal people would never do and i embrace the risk as long as i do not see it as gratuitous risk by my standards.

Without that population of mostly young males, who embraced risk, embraced going on adventures, while not embracing, at an early age, the more normal path of marrying and settling down, much of the modern world would never have been discovered. For young men hoping on a ship and heading out into the middle of nowhere, not knowing if they fall off the edge of the planet (flat earth, etc) was not in the norm.

Brain science has shown that same chasing of risk is now tied most closely to entrepreneurs. Brain science has shown there is a percent of people, mostly young males, who struggle to 'feel' swings in happiness, exhilaration, joy, as others do unless they take risks.

These risk takes (often who die younger) were of great benefit to the 'norm', 'married young family type', who did not want that risk but wanted the job the risk took to build the company.
Click to expand...
And raise the next generation

Risk takers have fewer offspring no doubt
 
  • Like
Reactions: QP!
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top