DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Celebrate Transgender Day of Visibility on Easter Sunday

No one said surgery was part of the definition. No one made the claim it was rampant.

Angry, old white guys telling the rest of the world what they should be thinking would seem to describe a lot of people in this thread in addition to the ones you're thinking of, yourself included. Without the old it might fit me, too. Though, I'm more trying to get people to think rather than trying to tell them that they should think what I think.

Mainly because I don't know what I think on the topic because I haven't felt the need to do a ton of research because it really didn't affect me. Having a "woman" try to pick me up in a bar and then flash me her "extra appendage" was mildly disturbing, but an outlier.

Personally, I think having a celebration of someone's sexual orientation/identity is "silly", but some people like having "silly" parties. Some people like having parties to celebrate a man's horrifying execution and alleged resurrection (Easter.) Count me out there, too. But, then, I'm a frequently miserable pseudo-curmudgeon. If it works for them, and it's not hurting anybody, have at it.

You use obvious and fact rather carelessly. You assume facts not in evidence. You don't know keith. You don't know what keith knows. Mental health care professionals have been known to be wrong. Some mental health care professionals don't think gender reassignment is a good idea. Some mental health professionals are likely transphobic zealots. You generalize and assume a lot.

Being obtuse isn't a common gaslighting tactic, and I don't do it intentionally. It's also not my fault if you misunderstand me when you ignore part of the message. There was already a "controversy." There you go with projecting again.

Question for you based on Keith's first post (and others)... Written with zero compassion or empathy or attempt to relate to an individual whonidentiies as transgender and insists that anyone that does suffers feom a mental ailment..... Do you believe it's feasible to suggest he knows more than qualified healthcare professionals? Is that a reasonable position to suggest.

I mean we don't know because this is a forum board. But we have to take an educated position based on what he's written. Right? We dont k ow that Keith isn't an alien from a distant galaxy, right. You cant prove he's s not. But do you really want to hold conversations based on a sort of school yard "you cant prove my outrageously improbable statement is a lie"???

I mean be the contrarian as is your want. But maybe stay within some boundaries? Please i urge yoh to reread K's original post and then tell me how probable it is thatbhe has a deeper understanding of Transgender issues and individuals than trained medical and mental health professionals.

*on a phone. Apologies for the many typos.

Yeah, I'm not saying I agree with keith. I think my post came about more due to my recent experiences with some "mental health professionals." Others are fine and helpful. Basing an entire argument on some generic "mental health professionals" seemed a rather weak argument. Now specific data from a peer reviewed journal of "mental health professionals" would have more validity. I've been spending way too much time digging through scientific journals recently.

edit: Pit constantly changing his story is likely also a factor. Constantly building on and adjusting what he had previously said and then claiming he had said the complex thing earlier is rather annoying.

Blah, blah, blah. Blah, blah, blah. It was obvious to anyone but a complete moron that I was saying health care professionals were more qualified. Your hand wringing and double talk isn't impessing anyone but yourself. People can see through your facade.

People can see that you rely on name calling, demeaning others, and deflection while selectively choosing what to respond to instead of actually discussing issues.

Framing a flippant, demeaning "what does he know?" as saying healthcare professionals are more qualified is, frankly, [censored]. Keith indicated that he was a "health care professional." Saying healthcare professionals know more than a health care professional with minimal context and a seemingly dismissive tone is a pathetic argument.

Hopefully people can see through the facade that you try to create of other people.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with Keith, but effectively saying his lived experience is worthless is a hostile act and sabotages meaningful exchange.

Gaslighting.

I never said his experiences were "worthless". Blatant lie.

It is a fine art!

Should people label you as his proxy now? Thanks for your great contribution that lacks anything of substance. Being a cheap shot artist isn't a noble venture. Try again. Your first act was weak.

I never said you literally said it. I wrote that you effectively said it. You said: "But of course keithfromzenia knows more than they do, right?"

It's not about knowing more than anyone else. It appears that you dismiss what he does "know" (his personal experience) because some nebulous other knows more.

Well, if the idea that someone somewhere knowing more than someone else invalidates the other's experience were valid, it would follow that we should only listen to the most knowledgeable individual at all times. That is ludicrous.

Gaslighting. Blatant lie.

Saying that a doctor who is professional and has earned a degree in a specific field knows more about something than someone who hasn't, isn't an any way claiming or effectively saying an "opinion" of someone else is worthless. That's a figment of your own imagination.

Except that's not what you said before. That may have been what you meant, but the way you phrased it would be hard to interpret as matter of fact.

"But Pitdawg knows more than peer-reviewed gaslighting literature, right?"

It's a pretty lousy way to phrase it, isn't it? Kind of seems like I'm calling you a liar and an idiot and saying that your thoughts aren't valid because you aren't an expert, right?

I'm not. "I'm saying something written in a scientific journal knows more than someone that hasn't been published."

I'm actually not saying that. You are entitled to your opinion. It just seemed like you were telling Keith he wasn't entitled to his. And then you tried to back it up by cherry picking a quote from a politifact article that if you actually read further supported his comments on gender dysphoria.

Edit: I'm not saying I support his opinion. Certainly not the tone of his opinion. Yet, to dismiss it out of hand based on some yeah but partially read article and your imagined knowledge of "health care professionals" as you seemed to be seemed rather in bad form.

Nobody dismissed it. Claiming a professional with a degree specializing in a field knows more than someone that doesn't isn't saying someone isn't entitled to their opinion. It's stating that people should measure the difference in one's opinion compared to actual professionals in that particular field. The lengths you will go to in order to twist my words or totally lack comprehension is astounding. Everyone's thoughts are valid. As long as you put them is perspective. Which seems to be a word you're not grasping in this case.

I think you are the one that is missing the fact that your perspective of your words and others' perspective of your words aren't the same thing.

But, it is what it is.

So now you have been appointed as the special Dawgtalker spokesperson for everyone? Sometimes people tend to think their opinions speak for the masses but it is what it is.

Nope, I'm just a firm believer in "see something, say something."

I've no desire to be seen as the spokesperson for a group that includes people that frequently offend my sensibilities.

It sure sounds like it. As you would say, maybe you just chose your words poorly.

Nah, the words were fine. It seems I just need to be more selective when it comes to their recipient. I definitely do seem to choose those poorly on here.

Nah, everyone can understand those words. You made the decision to speak for the perspective of others. It's there in print.

Pitzmagic!

GOPer hate…

Thanks for your great addition to the forum. Another trump squad member.

Like anything posted in this cesspool is a great addition.

Sorry, but not even Pitzmagic can convert me into a trump supporter?

Let me know when you decide to speak out against them. Your silence towards them is very telling.

You don’t need to be a trump supporter to vote for him. According to just about every GOPer here.

I voted for Nick Chubb in the last election. Seriously.

Your blindness/deafnesss is what's very telling. I've spoken out against Trump quite a few times.

I did in the primary this year. And I owe it all to you!!

How Murica votes now. Pathetic.

Uhh…I would take Nick Chubb over either one of these candidates every day if the week. Primarily because he wouldn’t want the position, which qualifies him over about 99.99999% of all politicians.

Nobody needs your view on "pathetic".

....or we could follow the ignorant and vote for one of the demented octogenarians.

Yup, Pathetic Democrat or Pathetic Republican. Those tend to be the choices.

What's patheticis is that in this once great country of ours only two choices are Trump and Biden

What’s really pathetic is that nearly half this country doesn’t know which choice is better. Murica.

Obviously, not everyone can be as smart as you.

Smart enough to know who’s the best choice isn’t exactly rocket science here.

Sadly the main difference is one is a disgusting human being and one is a decent human being. The contrast is obvious to everyone yet some have convinced themselves there's no difference.

So it's pathetic that half the country doesn't agree with you.

Nearly half, yep it is.