Just yesterday I may have gotten myself into trouble with my state health department where I work because during an all-staff video meeting, LGBT was mentioned by one of the chiefs and I answered with the fact that biological males who pretend to be female must still receive medical services that reflects his actual biological body. I'm not psychic, but the shock of what I said was almost palpable. The truth has become a liability because there are too many cowards within government and private offices which is allowing clownish malfeasance to cover over everything in our society. It's clownish because we're actually allowing people's FANTASIES-- whether it involves mental health or something else such as social fad-- to override other people's rights and obligations to do what is actually necessary for the good of individual and nation. It's malfeasant because it is destroying the freedoms of our nation and destroying people's lives including those in the LGBT community. This whole thing has become appallingly darkly ridiculous.
Telling a biological male that he is a female, because no one wants to hurt his feelings is the same as telling an Anorexic she could stand to lose a few pounds. It's criminal negligence by our healthcare and educational systems.
I was once on a forum where I made what I thought was the pretty obvious, common sense statement that men like to date pretty women. I got a storm of protest from people insisting that this was not true. One person wrote "citation needed". So I actually found a study where they investigated this and, surprise!, they found that men like to date pretty women.
I could understand if people said that men wanting pretty women is shallow or foolish or otherwise a bad thing. One could rationally debate that. But that wasn't the argument. Numerous people insisted that the statement was not true, that men do NOT prefer pretty women. I got numerous down-votes on my post for bringing the idea up.
I can only conclude that these people had never met an actual human male.
I've found that when making an obvious, rational statement many leftists respond with "citation necessary" or something similar. In other words, I can't think logically, prove it to me. I've stopped engaging with these types, at all.
“The way to a man’s heart is through his stomach.”
I have met men who are interested in other things, besides looks or a nice dowry (her dad has money and/or real estate that can be farmed or developed). Shared interest in guns, God, animals, cooking, or an equal give and take (he has money to help her pay for her dog rescue and she’s a good cook. This is the case with someone I know from high school).
My brother once admitted that he married his wife for money. She had $6,000 in the bank. And I thought, if I ever marry someone for money, I hope I hold out for more than $6,000.
Sadly, I have witnessed a woman haranguing a male friend for his very understandable desire to date women he found pretty and whose values aligned with his. With an earnestness worthy of a better cause she nagged him about "dating for diversity," whatever that's supposed to mean.
Woman: I have here a list of 50 things I expect from a husband, starting with rich, handsome, successful, athletic, generous, and tall, and working down to must love dogs and must like the same music I do.
Society: You go girl! Don't ever settle. Stick to your high standards.
Man: I'd kind of like a girl who isn't fat.
Society: How dare you! You misogynist pig! You should love her just the way she is!
And that is the difference, left and right in my experience are divided by their earnestness in babbling about what they believe. The right tends to be earnest about what they know.
"dating for diversity" I can't imagine dating or marrying someone to make a political statement. I'm white and I married a black woman, but not to make some kind of statement about diversity. Because I loved her as an individual. Her being black was never a reason to marry her nor a reason to not marry her.
I am 78, male and heterosexual and I still like pretty women. What constitutes a pretty woman is up for debate as to degree but what constitutes an ugly woman generally is not.
I don't respond to "citation needed". It's an informal forum. I've said my piece--take it or leave it--if you want to know more do your own research. If I ever happen to write a term paper or dissertation on the topic I'll be sure to cite sources.
And if they can't get a pretty one (with a "good face" as my ex put it) then they want one with a good body. The real jackpot is, according to this ex, a good body AND a good face.
However, it does seem that beauty plays a role. I mean presentation, attitude, that sort of thing. The ability to make someone feel good.
Women? A friend insisted that looks did not play a role in selecting a father for her child. BS, I said. Strength, good looks, height, charisma -- of course that's what women want.
For years I felt terrified to explain evolutionary biology to anyone. Imagine that. I'm still shaking my head at how we got here. I have my theories....guaranteed to make one "gender" very angry.
Funny how if a woman says she wants to marry a rich man, other women just nod and say "well of course". But if a man says he wants to marry a pretty woman, woman blast him for being shallow and misogynistic and so on.
We live in a strange time where people are afraid to say things that we all know are true. Like, I'm sure that 95+% of Americans know that you can't change your sex just by wishing really hard. Most 5 year olds can tell boys from girls with almost no effort. But no one is allowed to say that today. We're all supposed to pretend that we don't know this.
Except when it doesn't. Like Humpty Dumpty words mean exactly what the left want them to mean.
If gender and sex were really two different words, then why would sex seggregated sports be a trans issue ? Its because the left claim they mean different things, when they quite often use gender to refer to sex
Nope. Manmade male parts don’t count; body structure is different in males & females. Males are biologically stronger & usually larger than females.
The fake men want to compete against females bc they can’t win against other real men.
Females don’t enter male sports as a rule bc they know the odds are against them.
God made male & female with inherent strengths & weakness. We compliment each other. It’s not a competition; males are better at some things & females at others.
God is a no-no in conversations such as this.
When He was revered & worshipped by most Americans this trans mess was not on the table.
You have it wrong about "gender". The sexes, male and female, are real and "gender" has no objective reality. "Gender" is something had by Romance-language nouns, not the animal kingdom including humans. The word should be abandoned other than in Spanish and French classes.
According to just about any pre-woke dictionary, gender is a synonym for sex. They mean the same thing. After dictionary publishers went woke, a lot of convoluted nonsense started appearing.
Sometimes I daydream about having an opportunity to say the truth, because those who know the truth have an obligation to tell it. I guess I'm fortunate not to have the opportunity, since I live in a fairly sane situation - I don't have to be around silly, brainwashed NPC's hardly ever. Thank God.
The first stage is a faithful image/copy, The second stage is perversion of reality, The third stage masks the absence of a profound reality, The fourth stage is pure simulacrum, in which the simulacrum has no relationship to any reality whatsoever.
Simulacra and Simulation by Baudrillard
10 For-Sure Signs You're In A Cult
1. A single authoritative person or small group of people create rules to follow.
2. Your group is isolated or encouraged to stay and keep secrets within the in-group.
3. Critical thinking and questioning are met with resistance, deferment, and or punishment.
4. Cults are totalistic.
5. Hostility, sanction, or aggression when leaving the group is brought up.
6. Formal ceremonies and rituals take place to indoctrinate and reaffirm beliefs communally.
7. “Love Bombing" or bipolar behavior.
8. Food, work, and social activity are monitored or controlled.
9. A sense of “community" is extremely valued above the comfort and desire of the individual.
10. Important decisions are influenced or made by the people in charge.
Excellent take, straight down the list. It’s sad that we prioritize feelings over facts. In a one on one personal setting, one’s feelings should be prioritized, but the moment you speak of masses or policy that will affect masses, facts must take center stage.
Yes. If I said, I don't know, say that inflation was lower under President X than under President Y, I could comprehend someone asking for a citation. But when you state something that we all experience every day, like "rocks fall when you drop them", that's common knowledge, I don't need a citation.
Man, there's a ton of truth here. Great article. It's time we stand up to the bullies. That's what the Left has become. They don't bully in the sense we usually think, but it's bullying nonetheless. Fear mongering, virtue signaling, gaslighting, media
Just yesterday I may have gotten myself into trouble with my state health department where I work because during an all-staff video meeting, LGBT was mentioned by one of the chiefs and I answered with the fact that biological males who pretend to be female must still receive medical services that reflects his actual biological body. I'm not psychic, but the shock of what I said was almost palpable. The truth has become a liability because there are too many cowards within government and private offices which is allowing clownish malfeasance to cover over everything in our society. It's clownish because we're actually allowing people's FANTASIES-- whether it involves mental health or something else such as social fad-- to override other people's rights and obligations to do what is actually necessary for the good of individual and nation. It's malfeasant because it is destroying the freedoms of our nation and destroying people's lives including those in the LGBT community. This whole thing has become appallingly darkly ridiculous.
Telling a biological male that he is a female, because no one wants to hurt his feelings is the same as telling an Anorexic she could stand to lose a few pounds. It's criminal negligence by our healthcare and educational systems.
I’ve been using that same comparison for years!
I was once on a forum where I made what I thought was the pretty obvious, common sense statement that men like to date pretty women. I got a storm of protest from people insisting that this was not true. One person wrote "citation needed". So I actually found a study where they investigated this and, surprise!, they found that men like to date pretty women.
I could understand if people said that men wanting pretty women is shallow or foolish or otherwise a bad thing. One could rationally debate that. But that wasn't the argument. Numerous people insisted that the statement was not true, that men do NOT prefer pretty women. I got numerous down-votes on my post for bringing the idea up.
I can only conclude that these people had never met an actual human male.
I've found that when making an obvious, rational statement many leftists respond with "citation necessary" or something similar. In other words, I can't think logically, prove it to me. I've stopped engaging with these types, at all.
“The way to a man’s heart is through his stomach.”
I have met men who are interested in other things, besides looks or a nice dowry (her dad has money and/or real estate that can be farmed or developed). Shared interest in guns, God, animals, cooking, or an equal give and take (he has money to help her pay for her dog rescue and she’s a good cook. This is the case with someone I know from high school).
My husband tells people he married me because I had a pickup truck, guns and a liquor cabinet full of Scotch.
My brother once admitted that he married his wife for money. She had $6,000 in the bank. And I thought, if I ever marry someone for money, I hope I hold out for more than $6,000.
"citation needed"
Ahahah!!!
Sadly, I have witnessed a woman haranguing a male friend for his very understandable desire to date women he found pretty and whose values aligned with his. With an earnestness worthy of a better cause she nagged him about "dating for diversity," whatever that's supposed to mean.
Woman: I have here a list of 50 things I expect from a husband, starting with rich, handsome, successful, athletic, generous, and tall, and working down to must love dogs and must like the same music I do.
Society: You go girl! Don't ever settle. Stick to your high standards.
Man: I'd kind of like a girl who isn't fat.
Society: How dare you! You misogynist pig! You should love her just the way she is!
Ah! In other words, “I want a man who reflects ME!”
She could fill the bitch category box on the diversity chart.
Ahahah well kind of; the thing that really got to me was her earnestness, she genuinely believed the absurdities she was uttering.
And that is the difference, left and right in my experience are divided by their earnestness in babbling about what they believe. The right tends to be earnest about what they know.
"dating for diversity" I can't imagine dating or marrying someone to make a political statement. I'm white and I married a black woman, but not to make some kind of statement about diversity. Because I loved her as an individual. Her being black was never a reason to marry her nor a reason to not marry her.
I am 78, male and heterosexual and I still like pretty women. What constitutes a pretty woman is up for debate as to degree but what constitutes an ugly woman generally is not.
I don't respond to "citation needed". It's an informal forum. I've said my piece--take it or leave it--if you want to know more do your own research. If I ever happen to write a term paper or dissertation on the topic I'll be sure to cite sources.
And if they can't get a pretty one (with a "good face" as my ex put it) then they want one with a good body. The real jackpot is, according to this ex, a good body AND a good face.
However, it does seem that beauty plays a role. I mean presentation, attitude, that sort of thing. The ability to make someone feel good.
Women? A friend insisted that looks did not play a role in selecting a father for her child. BS, I said. Strength, good looks, height, charisma -- of course that's what women want.
For years I felt terrified to explain evolutionary biology to anyone. Imagine that. I'm still shaking my head at how we got here. I have my theories....guaranteed to make one "gender" very angry.
Next time, say women seek out men with few resources, aka poor.
Funny how if a woman says she wants to marry a rich man, other women just nod and say "well of course". But if a man says he wants to marry a pretty woman, woman blast him for being shallow and misogynistic and so on.
Too late! I'm already married to a beautiful woman! (Who just married me for money, but that's another story.)
So, a double, money and a pretty woman, life is good
Violent Speech is speech that threatens violence, not speech that you don't like and makes you "feel unsafe".
We live in a strange time where people are afraid to say things that we all know are true. Like, I'm sure that 95+% of Americans know that you can't change your sex just by wishing really hard. Most 5 year olds can tell boys from girls with almost no effort. But no one is allowed to say that today. We're all supposed to pretend that we don't know this.
We've gone from believing things we didnt know, to pretending to NOT believe things we know!
We are engaged in the intentional creation of Tragedy.
A clarification:
"Gender relates to grammar. There are up to three: masculine, feminine and sometimes neutral.
"Sex" refers to biology, and there are only two: male and female.
We dispense with genetic errors of conflation/chimera.
Except when it doesn't. Like Humpty Dumpty words mean exactly what the left want them to mean.
If gender and sex were really two different words, then why would sex seggregated sports be a trans issue ? Its because the left claim they mean different things, when they quite often use gender to refer to sex
Got a penis? Get on the team that has other people with penises.
No penis (either naturally or because dicketomy)? Join the team for people without penises.
Nope. Manmade male parts don’t count; body structure is different in males & females. Males are biologically stronger & usually larger than females.
The fake men want to compete against females bc they can’t win against other real men.
Females don’t enter male sports as a rule bc they know the odds are against them.
God made male & female with inherent strengths & weakness. We compliment each other. It’s not a competition; males are better at some things & females at others.
God is a no-no in conversations such as this.
When He was revered & worshipped by most Americans this trans mess was not on the table.
Gender is also a synonym for sex, according to six different pre-woke Websters I have.
Change in spelling. Went from LGBT TO LGBTWTF?
I think it’s now LGBTQMS-13
You have it wrong about "gender". The sexes, male and female, are real and "gender" has no objective reality. "Gender" is something had by Romance-language nouns, not the animal kingdom including humans. The word should be abandoned other than in Spanish and French classes.
According to just about any pre-woke dictionary, gender is a synonym for sex. They mean the same thing. After dictionary publishers went woke, a lot of convoluted nonsense started appearing.
Sometimes I daydream about having an opportunity to say the truth, because those who know the truth have an obligation to tell it. I guess I'm fortunate not to have the opportunity, since I live in a fairly sane situation - I don't have to be around silly, brainwashed NPC's hardly ever. Thank God.
Cults try to replace reality with their own.
The first stage is a faithful image/copy, The second stage is perversion of reality, The third stage masks the absence of a profound reality, The fourth stage is pure simulacrum, in which the simulacrum has no relationship to any reality whatsoever.
Simulacra and Simulation by Baudrillard
10 For-Sure Signs You're In A Cult
1. A single authoritative person or small group of people create rules to follow.
2. Your group is isolated or encouraged to stay and keep secrets within the in-group.
3. Critical thinking and questioning are met with resistance, deferment, and or punishment.
4. Cults are totalistic.
5. Hostility, sanction, or aggression when leaving the group is brought up.
6. Formal ceremonies and rituals take place to indoctrinate and reaffirm beliefs communally.
7. “Love Bombing" or bipolar behavior.
8. Food, work, and social activity are monitored or controlled.
9. A sense of “community" is extremely valued above the comfort and desire of the individual.
10. Important decisions are influenced or made by the people in charge.
Sounds a lot like MAGA, tbh
Excellent take, straight down the list. It’s sad that we prioritize feelings over facts. In a one on one personal setting, one’s feelings should be prioritized, but the moment you speak of masses or policy that will affect masses, facts must take center stage.
Myself, I laid out 10 truths to live by. You may enjoy it: https://open.substack.com/pub/tidbitsofaudacity/p/10-truths-to-live-by?r=h20p2&utm_medium=ios
“Feelings” will get you in trouble every time.
Thank you for telling it like it is. God bless you.
Yes. If I said, I don't know, say that inflation was lower under President X than under President Y, I could comprehend someone asking for a citation. But when you state something that we all experience every day, like "rocks fall when you drop them", that's common knowledge, I don't need a citation.
Man, there's a ton of truth here. Great article. It's time we stand up to the bullies. That's what the Left has become. They don't bully in the sense we usually think, but it's bullying nonetheless. Fear mongering, virtue signaling, gaslighting, media
BRILLIANT POST! SPOT ON!
Good job outta' you. 😊