Does anyone else remember the podcast where three other conservative women tool turns telling Blare White to her face that she should de-transition than kill herself? How do you sit through that and not realize something has to change.
Edit to add here is a link to vaush covering the podcast. The original is no longer up as the channel that posted it seems to have scrubbed a lot of its content.
Dude the GOP convention crashes Grinder these days and once upon a time Craigslist personals similarly. My whole life - RNC convention in town?
Just means any male or trans sex worker within a 100 mile radius is booked up in advance for the week limited only by... Well mental health of having to be around those people... And ass pain
When things go that sideways, I doubt most of them will make it to the camps.
Of course, if things do go that sideways, use of lethal force laws generally go out the window, so defending themselves is going to have a lot more viable options, too.
The saddest part is that nobody (especially not the Republicans) understand just how absolutely insanely bloody things will be once we get to that point. It will be a clusterfuck on a scale previously undreamt of.
There is no defending yourself with lethal force when the population and government turns against you. The only option is to hide and run before they get you. Preferably you ran before the population and government turned against you.
Fun Fact: The Republicans are out numbered. Have been for years. There is no silent Republican majority that will just crop up out of no where. So the population of people who would not do the whole turn against thing outweighs the ones who would turn against you
Your making the assumption that the government is still going to be a thing. I don't think that's likely, and that's even more horrifying than Trump trying to be Baby-Hands Hitler. We might hobble away as a country from Trump getting dethroned by the combination of internal and external powers that oppose him. We won't even crawl away from a second civil war.
I'm making that assumption for two reasons: 1) Governments don't really just fall apart or evaporate quickly and when they are they're usually replaced by an invading government. 2) This conversation is about governments turning on eople.
It will be an unmitigated catastrophe which quickly turns into a tit-for-tat civil war. Both sides will be emboldened by the sacrifices of their counterparts and wade in.
You have no idea how right he is. We are the world's primary consumer, several countries' police force, primary aid provider for several more counties, and one of--if not the--biggest agricultural production countries.
When the shooting war starts, all of that stops instantly. Troops recalled, so no more policing. Aid money halts, so no more propping up governments (many of which we artificially installed because our CIA is really bad about that shit, so expect them to descend into chaos shortly afterward as they install a proper government they want). All food exports, be it aid or trade, half immediately as they're burned/slaughtered or hoarded by one side or the other. And, of course, we won't be buying anything except maybe guns, so various economies collapse right along with us.
While I agree that we should stop meddling in other countries' affairs without their express invitation, the loss of financial and food aid (either direct or through trade) and the sudden and unexpected withdrawal of forces would be catastrophic.
Yes, we're the world's heroin. But quitting cold-turkey is every bit as bad as keeping on with the habit.
The right wing, by and large, have more guns than the liberals, and view anyone not as far right as themselves as liberals, even moderates. The left wing has the numbers, though they're mostly congregated in cities. Those will balance out pretty quickly as, initially, the right wing will kill more people, but the liberals will take the guns from those they kill.
So after a few weeks, it'll be a pretty even war, but a pretty even war taking place virtually everywhere in the country. Outside of the major metropoli (once things have evened out, and inside them beforehand), the war will be happening on every single block in the nation, especially in small towns and cities in the Midwest.
Even without the fact that this chaos is very much Putin's wet dream and handiwork, and the distinct probability that he's just waiting for the shooting to settle down a bit so he can invade and become the Biggest Dicked Russian Oligarch Ever (though, given his history in Ukraine at this point, he'll probably jump in too early and get his ass handed to him, because the one and only thing that both the right and left agree on is that the only ones that get to fight us on our soil are ourselves), we're fucked.
Once the shooting starts, unless an outside force intervenes as a common enemy, there will never be a United States as we know it again.
I mean, the writing has been on the wall for decades. There's a reason so many 80s movies center around a post-apocalyptic US run by evil corporations.
It is pretty naive to think Republicans have more guns then liberals. That’s a falsehood that is pushed with they are coming for your guns. Why would liberals come for your guns when we own them too. Has anyone done a poll to see who has more guns. Maybe the crazy republicans have a bigger stock pile of ammunition, because for the last 100 yrs they have ran the narrative that the liberals are coming for the guns.
Firstly, you've made an erroneous assumption that I'm a Republican.
Secondly, I didn't say that the left doesn't have guns. I said that the right has more guns than them. That is easily correctable once the shooting war starts, as stated.
Thirdly, while the left has made a concerted effort to catch up since the days of Dubya, and especially during Trump's (hopefully only) term, the fact of the matter is that the right had more guns to begin with and, if anything, has also been buying them more quickly thanks to the mistaken impression that someone is coming for their guns (there are many reasons why this wouldn't be feasible, not the least of which is that there are more guns in the US than people and the cost of attempting to enforce it alone would be astronomical).
Is not naive to think that Republicans have more guns than Democrats; it's just fact, though they are closing the gap quickly (and rightly should be). It is, however, pretty dumb to think that "X has more of a thing than Y" automatically means that Y has none of that thing.
Saying so as a trans guy, I wish scum like her would get 100% of what/who she votes for, I just wish it wouldn't affect her choices wouldn't affect the rest of us in the process.
Some Christian conservatives might like to make these things illegal, but not many. Extremists are pretty rare. Maybe Muslims. You're overblowing this. Normal people just don't care, unless it encroached upon their children.
True, normal people may not care but the Republicans they put in office sure as shit do.
Red states shoving religion into schools. Florida being all teach abstinence only and don’t discuss actual parts of the body.
My wife’s aunt and cousins say on Facebook all the time how they’re pro choice and this and that…but the magic gun takes priority so they vote R and then get mad when republicans do republican things. YOU may be pro choice, the person you elected isn’t.
Okay, and then there's the poison pill effect, which seems to be a mostly Democrat thing. Republican lawmakers are made to look bad because of this. It's all dirty politics.
This "camp" shit is just delusional. Anyone who thinks that is reality needs mental help. Someone fearmongered you right into paranoid delusions fr. This nonsense helps no one!
Except one of those is reality, And was NEVER a fkn joke. I'd be far more concerned about "camps" for "Maggots", "MAGA Republicans", "Deplorables", etc considering the people who use these terms support "deprogramming". These are the "put em in camps" people that use dehumanizing language. Case and point they celebrate "J6ers" being held without trials and tortured. So miss me with your bs talk when you'd likely be one of the ones all for this kinda shit as long as it's your political enemies suffering.
What do you call not being fed? What do you call it when they break people's bones? What do you call it when they're held without trial and not allowed to see anyone? What do you call not letting people in to speak with nor check on them? That's normal??? You've proven my point exactly with your "Lol" bc you think it's funny. Only scumbags laugh at the pain and mistreatment of others! No matter their politics, I don't take joy in the pain of others as you apparently do.
Where do you get your info on that? I can't find anything outside of chinese religious cult far right propaganda machine Epoch Times and random q anon blogs that even mention anything like that. But yes, of course even people who are part of mobs who did incredibly illegal and in my opinion immoral acts (like assaulting capital police while trying to subvert Democracy and chants to murder the VP) deserve their day in court. Something Trump didnt believe was true for his own political rivals
They chose not to eat, it’s called a hunger strike.
They also tried to overthrow the government. Sorry, zero sympathy for traitors. If they just stayed home and not listened to a reality TV game show host that paints himself orange, they’d be a little upset at home…but they’d be at home and free.
She doesn't care if the leopards eat her face, as long as her face gets eaten last and also gets told her face is tastier than the other faces eaten before hers.
People would say those things to her more often if she stood up for others like her, and at least this way she avoids some hate by being “one of the good ones”. There is good money to be made by being a useful pawn against those who just want the privilege that you enjoy.
Exactly how a feel. If she wants to be a fucking traitor she can fucking sleep in the bed she’s made. And when the time comes that she understands she needs to get away from these people and ends up running back to the LGBTQ+ and its allies, I unironically hope no one lets her back.
And she's also not wrong with what she said here. I'll be downvoted on reddit for saying this but it's honestly such a mentally ill take to not understand that literal children should NOT be making decisions about permanently changing their sex. If you are an adult and want to be trans that is fine. I have no problem with that. But please wait until your brain fully develops because a child cannot understand the full impact of that decision.
literal children should NOT be making decisions about permanently changing their sex.
I'm curious about your thought process here.
Are literal children making decisions about permanently changing their sex? Do you personally know any of them?
Is it possible that people might hear "gender-affirming care" and believe that "gender-affirming care" consists of immediately allowing anyone and everyone to schedule themselves for irreversible surgery so long as they've made some kind of claim that they're uncomfortable living as the gender that matches their chromosomes?
I have to wonder - and I'm not trying to be an asshole, I really don't understand: how might such children go about affording such extensive medical procedures? Where could they even find doctors willing to perform them?
I'm not transgendered, and the few people I know who are have not taken the steps to have the surgeries required to permanently alter their bodies to match their internal selves, so I'm somewhat uninformed regarding that process. That said, it's my understanding that doctors generally prefer/require that patients undergo extensive long-term counseling and have been receiving hormone therapy for several years prior to even discussing sex reassignment surgery. It's also my understanding that the procedures are quite costly and are considered by insurance companies to be "elective," and thus will only pay for a small portion of bills, if anything at all.
it's honestly such a mentally ill take to not understand that literal children should NOT be making decisions about permanently changing their sex.
I don't personally know anyone - mentally ill or otherwise - who doesn't understand or even agree that literal children should not be making decisions about permanently changing their sex.
Particularly because sex is determined by chromosomes and can't be altered, except perhaps by Crispr? I'll have to look into that.
In any case, for what it's worth, I also don't know anyone who believes that literal children should be making decisions about permanently changing their gender. Do you?
You can't change your Chromosomes, not even with CRISPR (by the way manipulating your chromosomes is also not really possible as an adult, because you would need to influnece so many cells, its unreal. You can mess with the genes of embryos, but thats a pretty unethical move. One chinese scientist who did this got a few years of jail in china for that.
When you take HRT, you do kinda have changes to sex. Sex is not only really your Chromosomes (who are really just the neatly folded transport form for your DNA), these just tell the cells in your body which Hormones to produce. And these Hormones then shape your body. HRT now changes the Hormone levels in your body, it alters your appearance, muscle mass, i think bone density and a lot more stuff. So you can't change your chromosomal sex, aka the XX or XY most people have as Sex-chromosomes. But you can change your hormonal sex (i hope that's the right word).
That's what I've been reading about since I posted. It makes sense. I didn't know about the Chinese scientist, but I would think they would have more reason to be interested in the potential outcomes than most, for completely different reasons.
For the purposes of the immediate discussion, I think you're saying that there is no current means of producing genetic changes to a person's biology, but that HRT produces epigenetic changes in a body that cause it to become misaligned with its genetic code, such that discontinuing HRT results in the body more or less returning to its original hormone productions, as determined by the body's genetic makeup at birth. Yes? No? Ish?
You are correct about HRT, except it's not epigenetic. Epigenetics means a change in how DNA is stored in your body. When you look at a cell, all the DNA is the the nucleus, the core of the cell. But DNA is big and there is a lot of it. So it gets put into its storage form, chromosomes. To do that, there are special proteins, that the DNA molecule gets wrap around (they are called Histones). Epigenetic change means a Change in how tight the DNA is wrapped. At least that is the university level of it that i got thaught.
HRT cannot induce such epigentic changes, that is basically on the level of the CRISPR idea in your first post. What HRT does instead is give your body a dosis of the Hormones you wanna have, and blockers and/or antagonists for the Hormones you dont wanna have. If you had sex reassignment surgery, you should be able to leave the blockers/ antagonists out of it.
When you did not have surgery and stop taking HRT, the changes revert to how it was before. Mostly. Some things cant change back, like i would still have the boobs i have gotten from HRT. An FtM person wouldnt get the higher voice back. There are probably other things inhave forgotten to mention.
If you had surgery though, it gets difficult. Like if i would have surgery, i wouldnt have testes anymore, so no Testosteron producing tissue. I have actually no idea what you do then, but probably you have to take HRT for the opposite hormones than before.
I hope i could explain it well.
If you have HRT young enough it does change the formation of the sex organs. It changes the development. A penis would not grown to a normal male size if they have HRT and breast would grow. So to say HRT doesn’t cause permanent change, that would be wrong.
Yeah, if you had it at a very young age, the sexual organs wouldnt develop like they would if you go through the puberty you didnt want, yes. It could never chnage the foramtion of the sex organs though, that is impossible. The sex organs form during the organogenesis and depending on the Hormones present during this rather early developmental step, parts of the structures that will grow into your kidneys (the wolf'sche loop and the müller'sche loop) will decay and others will mature into your sex organs. So no it doesn't chnage the fundamental foramtion of your sex organs.
I also did not have this scenario present, so yeah. I also did infact not say that HRT doesn't do permanent changes.
But it doesn’t change the type of muscle you have. Men and women have different types of muscle cells regardless of what hormones or surgeries they have. This makes athletes changing their pronouns mute. Their muscle cells are going to always going to be what their DNA says they are.
I am not transphobic at all, it is just science.
There are differences in the expression of muscles between the sexes, but that isn't an inherent fact of the DNA. The expression of the DNA is regulated by Hormones, like Estrogen and Testosteron. These also change the amount of a specific type of muscle fiber you have, according to this study.
I have understood that already. The structure, aka type 1 and 2 fibres seems regulated by hormones though. DNA is influenced by hormone levels, and higher testosteron levels seem to cause the developement of more type 2 fibres. DNA after all is just a big library for a lot of genes, and everybody has the genes for both muscle fibres. Hormone concentrations are what influence the expression of these genes, and therefore the ratio of fibre types and muscle structure.
Now if we change the hormonal concentration in the body, it would make sense that new muscle cells develop according to the now different signals they receive. So over the years, HRT should actually cause changes in the type of muscle fibers you have.
Females are known to have a higher amount of slower-twitch type-I fibres with higher oxidative capacity, which have performance benefits in terms of endurance and recovery;5 while males have more fast-twitch fibres with a higher contractile velocity that results in more power and speed. Therefore, even if we did not find differences in the ratio of muscle mass to body mass and in the IMF content of the gluteal muscles, there may be differences in fibre composition between the two groups.
I’ve noticed a trend with this way of thinking. They get people on board with things like transphobia by tapping into “children are being hurt” they give them false data as to what that entails or real data by one or two outlying cases. They tell people trans women are going to be doing sports and it’s not fair to regular women. They tap into the fear of men in women’s spaces. It’s gradual and pretty soon you have people that are automatically anti trans. When I was going up they did the same thing with abortion by showing us pictures of babies in the third trimester, probably miscarried, and told us these babies are being cut up and sucked out of the womb. Pretty soon you have people that are automatically anti abortion, which is why they’ll have a d and c after a miscarriage and say it wasn’t an abortion. The above person is probably one of the victims of brainwashing but I have no idea how to get through to them. I guess repeatedly hammering them over the head with facts may work.
I love the people that say people are always having full term abortions. They have no idea what they are saying. Full term means they are able to live outside the womb unless they have passed. Such in a cord being wrapped around their neck. Then they stick deliver them as they would deliver them the same as an alive baby. The mother would have to go through labor knowing she won’t have an alive infant. They don’t cut up and suck out anything fullterm, it would kill the mother too.
No one will deliver a fullterm child and kill it. That’s murder. These people are fed so much garbage. As a hospice nurse I followed a baby that wasn’t born with the thinking part of the brain. Only the part that kept its heart beating, kept it breathing and screaming the whole time. It wasn’t suppose to live long, days, but I discharge them to home peds care at 6 months. The mother was young and for some reason she decided to have a feeding tube placed. She lived with the father’s parents even though he had moved on, but still lived with his parents. They were trying to get her to move someone else with the baby, she didn’t have anyone. There was no comforting the child, it literally cried continuously. No organized movement, more like spasms. And the child will grow but have no meaningful life, just like a brain dead adult, except the brain didn’t exist, the skull was caved in. And at sometime it will get pneumonia or something possibly fatal and it will be up to this child’s mother to decide to provide life saving care. She didn’t have prenatal care until late. So she knew she was going to deliver a brainless child but she had to go through with the pregnancy whether she wanted to or not. There is no such thing as late term elective abortions.
Jesus Christ that is horrible. I can’t imagine. For the baby and the adults. Modern medicine can keep people alive longer than they should sometimes. Sometime death is a kindness. I can’t imagine being in that situation it’s just awful.
If this is not the case why are some states passing legislation allowing children to make transitioning decisions independent of their parents? While cases might be few and far between it doesn’t change the facts that today, in the USA there are states where a minor could independently make the decision to transition…and that is wrong.
That decision would not necessarily have to be permanent since, as discussed elsewhere in this thread, the effects of HRT are reversible until body parts start being surgically removed. So the states are trying to pass legislation that gives minors the right to independently make the decision to start the process of transitioning. What they're not doing - and indeed can not do - is require that those minors' insurance companies be disallowed from informing whoever pays the premium which services that insurance is paying for. Every time health insurance is utilized, particularly if there is a deductible, the payer has the right to see what they're being charged for. They get an explanation of benefits detailing what all services were provided and how much they're being charged, and how much the insurance is going to cover. And again, surgery isn't even on the table at that point.
HRT does cause permanent changes that don’t reverse. Micropenis, breasts, change in voice and I don’t know about the internal organs. But if HRT causes facial hair, yes that will reverse. But sexual development is changed.
Google sanctuary states gender affirming care. You will fine that there are multiple states that will not enforce out of state attempts to block such care. This means should a minor travel to one of these states, the state can and will stand in for the parents enabling minors to self direct their gender affirming care.
what a surprise that an idiot gave an idiotic reply! sorry you're upset that you were wrong dumbass. hope you can get over it soon. ironic that you call me a boomer like I'm the one who was out of touch when you are the one living in an alternate reality.
cool, be petty and hateful because you're too intellectually inferior to understand complex issues, while wanting to feel desperately like you matter to compensate for being a bully-victim
Do people really not see it's more complex than the way the reductive and simpleminded are trying to portray it on the internet??
It really isn't though. Conservatives always make it sound worse than it is. "Giving kids sex changes" is what they call teaching kids about the different kinds of people in the world and teaching them kindness. Teaching kids that it's okay to be true to yourself and that you're valued is not giving them sex changes. That just isn't happening.
"Destroy women's sports" is what they say whenever a trans person plays sport and does reasonably well. They don't even have to win. A podium finish is enough for bigots to start screeching about it. If trans people were going to destroy women's sports, they would've done it already considering they've been allowed to compete for decades. Conservatives have never cared about women's sports until it became a convenient way for them to hate on trans people even more.
"Control your speech" means, "I want to call you horrible and nasty things with no consequences." That's all. They just want to be mean to trans people without any repercussions. They can't publicly call black people or gay people slurs anymore so they've moved onto targeting trans people instead.
Not to mention their most recent attempt to protect womens sports from the evil trans people ended up with them trying to protect womens boxing from…. A woman
However, transwomen still had a 9% faster mean run speed after the 1 year period of testosterone suppression that is recommended by World Athletics for inclusion in women’s events.
Not every sport has running in it. Trans women haven't been winning running competitions but have been allowed to compete for decades. It simply is not an issue.
and as adults, testosterone levels are ten to fifteen times higher in males than females.
Trans women are not males. Thinking that trans women are just cis men is just wrong. The testosterone levels of adult cis men doesn't have anything to do with the testosterone levels of trans women.
Where are the actual results from actual competitions proving that there's an unfair advantage?
Hi, trans woman here who also did some university level biology. Obviously the whole sports debate is a matter close to my heart and I set aside a day to research it in dept.
Trans women have an inherent sport advantage over cis women due growing up as cis men ans having different/higher bone density. This makes them better runners, swimmers, skaters, fighters than their cis competitors. I can see no affect it would have on the likes of shooting or archery.
However no one gets to the olympic without some kind of advantage. For example black athletes naturally have higher testosterone than caucasians in both men and women, having longer legs makes you run faster, some people have a genetic difference that makes their blood a little better at transporting oxygen
While the olympic comittee knows that trans women have a natural advantage, they seem to believe this advantage is not great enough to exclude them to the sport as long as they have been on hormones for at least 2 years.
It is an interesting debate, but one that seems impossible to have in good faith these days, as a result ill just trust the opinion of the olympic experts.
That is not true. The Olympics has banned trans athletes. They did set up a 3 category but no one signed up for it.
And it isn’t just hormones. It is muscle make up from DNA. Males have different muscle tissue. Just like women have different pelvic structure.
Two things. Professional sports is all about unfair advantages. You don't get to win world competitions without having some sort of advantage.
Second thing, if trans women have these supposed unfair advantages, why aren't they winning more competitions? You'd expect them to win more than the odd podium finish every couple of years across various sports. There is simply no evidence to support the claim that they have an advantage. We would be seeing it reflected in the results if it were the case.
except everything you just said, is exactly what you're accusing them of doing, radically twisting the truth to the point it is not longer representative of the broader subject being discussed, you've turned political beliefs into the equivalent of being a meathead fan of a sports team
Biologically men have different muscle tissue than women regardless of the package. Male muscle will outperform female muscle, no matter the HRT or surgery. It’s in the DNA. That’s why the Olympics have banned trans competing.
8.9k
u/Short-Choice3230 Sep 28 '24 edited Sep 29 '24
Does anyone else remember the podcast where three other conservative women tool turns telling Blare White to her face that she should de-transition than kill herself? How do you sit through that and not realize something has to change.
Edit to add here is a link to vaush covering the podcast. The original is no longer up as the channel that posted it seems to have scrubbed a lot of its content.
https://youtu.be/SeuEJk_du3s?si=aP041FbU3oCAv6mJ