- https://the-mad-pirate-prints.teemill.com/
💀
@TheMadPirate @Nonetrix
I love how you people miss the point when talking to terfs... They're biological fundamentalists. For them gender = sex and that's it. They don't make the same distinction between the two that you probably do.
@IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @TheMadPirate
Did I state ANYWHERE that I love trannies? I was just educating people on why they'll inevitably fail at arguing with a terf about the topic.
@IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @TheMadPirate
I'd rather not reveal my stance for now.
@IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @TheMadPirate
Nice try giving me nightmares. Unfortunately I just woke up.
Cuck, they would have to literally not leave the house to do zero impact to children and society at large (aka impossible). Stop taking bad lolbert type arguments.
That's because you do not know me.
I do that all time.
Things like :
"I wouldn't have a problem becoming a communist AS LONG AS they prove me a) that Marxist theory has no unfalsifiable hypothesis and b) Marx's theory has never been falsified by empirical evidence" or "I wouldn't have any issues dating a modern strong independent woman AS LONG AS a) she is not hysteric, b) she is not a narcissist and b) she is not insecure".
I know exactly what I am doing there.
That is a thought experiment that makes them have to prove an unprovable claim, it is the opposite of what you are doing in the tranny situation. In the situation you are making YOURSELF have to prove a unprovable claim (prove that at all time trannies are degrading society in every various situation to have the moral argument that trannies hurt children/society) you are willingly backing yourself into that position to be clever.
the entire point is that THEY CAN'T PROVE THAT, not without ADMITTING they are purposefully harming people.
They don't have to prove it, you do since you made the moral argument that you will accept trannies if they aren't causing harm. That makes YOU have to prove they are causing harm. In your marxist example THEY have to prove that marxism leads to the utopia they claim.
And how the hell I am going to do that if I am purposefully inserting a "catch-22" situation then ?
You're proving my point, you have to prove it is a catch-22 which leaves wiggle room to easily push the boundaries. You already ceded the ground that wearing a dress as man and cutting your dick off is fine by saying "trannies are fine as long as they don't bring their mental illness into the public", jews would slippery slope that to pedophilia in no time. Because against you are leaving the door open and having to prove the morality yourself for something obvious.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx I do not have to prove is a catch-22 ( since I already know it is because I PUT IT THERE). It is THEM who have to “solve” the catch-22 dilemma.
They don't have to solve anything, you have to show where the boundaries are for your catch-22, again just by the wording you ceded cutting dicks off and dresses is fine. Basically in your "catch-22" to ceded 1/2 the battle, you're already at "which bathroom" phase.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx
In your marxist example THEY have to prove that marxism leads to the utopia they claim.
Show me a single Marxist on Earth than can do that. Show me. I’ll wait.
I said that marxist example was a example of a good argument frame work, now compare that to your tranny one.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx What part of “there is no way they can’t bring their mental illness back into society” do you do not understood ?.
You accepting them "as long as the don't bring their mental illness into society" which defaults that them being trannies isn't mental illness (because you will accept a "not mentally ill tranny" by that reasoning).
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx Man, you are really awful at reading comprehension.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx Then show me a trannie that is not affected by Sexual Identification Disorder ( a DSM cataloged mental illness ).
Member when gay was a mental illness? Besides we aren't talking about dr credentials, we are talking about how you fail to frame a good argument about trannies.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx In that regard, whether it is a mental illness or not is irrelevant. They will, individually, suffer the health hazards of their own lifestyle.
the-health-hazards-of-homosexuality-what-the-medical-and-psychological-research-reveals.jpg
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx As I said, is like me saying “I wouldn’t blow the head of a commie AS LONG AS they do not try to take away private property”.
... which allows them to do anything short of that. Again your marxist example is the way to go, "prove to me that you can make the uptopia you claim without me giving up anything", simple as.
@philmchawk @Nonetrix @TheMadPirate @IRLStreamer
You seem to fail to understand that a commie by definition will try to take your property
Of course, but why give any ground? Why give them anything but property? Why not cut them off at the very beginning by requiring them to show they can create utopias without you giving up anything?
@philmchawk @alyx @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix That’s the WHOLE POINT of that statement !
@TheMadPirate @Nonetrix @IRLStreamer @philmchawk
He won't get it. You might as well ignore him.
@alyx @Nonetrix @IRLStreamer @philmchawk He thinks I can “care about the group”. Sorry,but my empathy is not high enough to “care”.
@alyx @Nonetrix @IRLStreamer @philmchawk The issue with this people is that all the time they talk about “sacrifice” and “caring” for the group, but they can never prove me what do I personally and individually gain from doing that. In other words “what do I gain from helping you?” , if I get no net benefit, why should I help your group in the first place ?.
You can give countless examples but at the end of the day the way the world works in your mind is imaginary (some mysticial land where everyone just does whatever they want while not affecting you and you are king trillionaire that doesn't have to worry about the heroin needles on the ground or people shitting in the streets). It is pointless to argue with lolberts but you are arguing against their imagination. The only time your philosophy ever even semi worked was when America was being settled (and even then you would have been scalped by a red) because everyone was so spread apart, besides that it has never and will never work.
As you mentioned, in order for trannies to not bringing their mental illness and "misery loves company" behavior back into society they would to successfully repress and manage their narcissistic tendencies ( which is comorbid in around 80% of people with Sexual Identification Disorder ), not to mention also their Borderline Disorder ( which tends to be also a comorbidity of SID ).
As I said, I know what I am doing.
No even just seeing them is enough to degrade society, you don't know what you're doing. You backing yourself into a bad position by trying to clever.
Individualists lost when two cavemen figured out they can beat up one caveman, it is time to get over it.
Individualist won when they figured out that a good gun can take two cavemen armed with nothing but batons.
But the opposite is what happened, an army with guns forced said people into submission.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx Those weren’t the cavemen you were talking about though.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ? First you move the goalpost and now you are jumping through a wormhole into a strawman. Fuck man, you are really, really bad at bloodsporting.
You brought guns to a caveman fight and are now saying i'm moving through wormholes? lmao.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx Your collectivist cavement didn’t have guns. An individualist created a gun for self defense and it turned out he could take a lot of cavemen. That was the point. Then you moved the goalpost jumping from cavemen to state armies. So now, your cavemen still lost to a gun, sorry.
Guns were created for collective use (armies) though. 2 gunmen > 1 gunman.
@philmchawk @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx but what you have is 1 gun owner > 2 cavemen
@PepeWalnuts @IRLStreamer @Nonetrix @alyx @philmchawk individual can also cooperate in order to defeat another group without falling into collctivism ( i.e. The American Revolutionaries in 1776 ).
@TheMadPirate @Nonetrix
Nothing I can do about it. But you just need to be aware of this when trying to talk to one. Otherwise any argument you make will be an automatic miss. 
@PepeWalnuts @Nonetrix @alyx Actually there is. It starts by considering there is an scale hierarchy : biological in the micro and sociological in the macro , and then realizing that there is a non linear multi-scale path from one scale to the other. A social constructivist falls into an ecological fallacy, a biological determinist falls into an atomistic fallacy.
So the truth is realizing in which scale you are analyzing a problem and taking into account the appropriate elements relevant to that particular scale.
