Kisses wrote:
Railey2 wrote:
There's no reason to believe that the rise of transgender people can't easily be explained by the disappearance of social stigma.
The fact that you won't even consider that as a possibility and straight out deny it, tells me a lot about you.
You're super biased. Not that i'd be surprised about that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Let's be real, this is the theory that most (maybe most?) ppl come up with given some time for thought and is the most logical when you weigh everything else up
most people are idiots, whats new.
the best theory is the one that encompasses all thinkable factors and proposes that the observed result is a combination of everything, with a ratio tilted one way or the other. Reality isn't black and white most of the time. People who deny every factor but one are making the issue out to be much simpler than it is, one of the hallmarks of extremism.
B1rd is a textbook extremist, he's made that abundandly clear many times and he does it here again. Extremists like him will hold very black-and-white opinions.
Look at this for example:
B1rd wrote:
Considering there has been no significant presence of transgender people throughout history, even as a "repressed minority group", it leads me to believe that it's just a social phenomenon created by progressivism.
Here we have a very extreme opinion. He claims that transgender people
never had a significant presence, in
no society before ours,
not even as a repressed minority group.
just one quick google search can convince any rational person of the opposite, but that isn't be the main focus here. Just think about how he worded his opinion and about what he's saying. Can you see the extremism?
To expand on this: The other extremist side would be that there are no social factors at all, that it's all biological and that everyone who claims to be transgender is transgender.
That would be equally stupid and people who spew bullshit like that are usually just wasting everyones time.
in that sense B1rd is not so different from Mahogany, an extremist that's on the opposite side of the spectrum.
When it comes to anything that is even remotely complicated, you'll always have a variety of factors playing into it. When you see someone denying a complete set of factors entirely, it should always raise your suspicions. Especially when its B1rd, lel.
B1rd wrote:
There is no reason why I should accept the premise that transgenderism is grounded in biological reality rather than being a social phenomenon. You call me an "extremist" because I don't accept something you admit you have no evidence for. Considering there has been no significant presence of transgender people throughout history, even as a "repressed minority group", it leads me to believe that it's just a social phenomenon created by progressivism.
i have no evidence for my hunch on the ratio between transgender people that aren't actually transgender (misled by a wide array of social and psychological factors) and transgender people that are actually transgender (biological basis).
i have very good reason to believe that both exist, though.
But honestly, i'd rather end this conversation here. As i said before, talking to you about anything that is even remotely connected to your extremist beliefs is a complete waste of time.
B1rd wrote:
Thank you, O omniscient one, for giving a comprehensive analysis of my thoughts, how I arrived at them, and how they compare to objective reality which you have a perfect understanding of.
But you complain about me being condescending, haha
Did it feel good to talk down to me? Hypocrite, lol.