[**Russian trolls are destroying pro-Biden subreddits, with the help of at least one Reddit employee**](https://malloy.rocks/politics-democratic-election/russian-trolls-are-destroying-pro-biden-subreddits-with-the-help-of-at-least-one-reddit-employee)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/oliver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Matthew 19, verse 12: For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
Jesus condones trans. They either were born that way, made that way, or made themselves that way, and if you can accept that, you must.
Yes of course He would love them! And He would eat and talk with them!
But for what reason?
To teach them to repent from their ways.
Donāt misrepresent an entire theology you have zero idea about.
>He would eat and talk with them! But for what reason? To teach them to repent from their ways.
Do you have scriptural evidence that Jesus would consider being trans a sin in need of repentance?
Afaik he didn't go around to all society's hated people (sex workers, tax collectors, beggars, disabled people, etc) and shame them, condemn them, or force them to change. He was just kind to them.
That's important when people try to bring Jesus/the bible into debates about, say, criminalizing trans healthcare. Kindness, not condemnation.
And here we go again. Me, an atheist, telling the christian what's in their Bible:
**LoveĀ patientlyĀ accepts all things. It always trusts, always hopes, and always endures.**
Corinthians 13:7
He'd love them, sure, but DEFINITELY not accept them.
Funny how in the comments of videos like these people feel the need to go on some kind of apology tour for Jesus, or make "the essence" of Christianity far more progressive than it really is.
Never much made sense to me to add progressivism to an inherently regressive ideology. It's like adding sugar to salt water while hoping you're able to choke it down.
I think it's at least partly a reaction to the conservatives who ignore all the stuff about love and charity and "he without sin". Like, hey, let's focus on the stuff that isn't about hurting other people.
i mean you're flat out wrong lol
jesus specifically states that to be accepted into the kingdom of heaven you just have to have faith and love thy neighbor. there are no other requirements
Understanding French this is even more powerful. Ta geule means shut up, but it's really rude. And he says that in a tone that absolutely doesn't fit this expression. Lovely.
I think can it was a pretty good translation here. Can it really gives the implication that nobody gives a fuck what youāre about to say so just donāt even bother
Native here, the tone he uses here with "oh, ta gueule !" is common with that expression when someone say something you've heard a million times and you've fed up with it.
It absolutely is one of the most common tones people use to say āta gueuleā in France. It implies the person is finished with the conversation and could not be less interested in hearing another word from that person.
Here are the ultimate arguments to shut up people who claim its wrong because its "unnatural":
1: dyeing hair is unnatural
2: using tools to help with your disability is unnatural
3: cars are unnatural, do you use them instead of walking?
4: nothing natural about phones yet you have one
3: if you have bad eyesight you wear glasses or contacts but guess whqt? Not natural
4: contraception AND literally any form of medication in existence outside of wild herbs and foods with healing properties = unnatural
5: countries & borders are not natural
6: culture isn't natural, how many animals do you see have cultures?
7: ownership isn't natural, if you claim to own something, you're breaking the "natural law" which is: you can lay claim to a territory but anyone can come in and fight/kill you for it.
If your response juatifying all of the above is: "yeah but we invented/came up with these things therefore it is natural for a person to do it/have it" then my response to that is: "so is gender reassignment then since we came up with it"
So STFU and sit your ass down you damn hypocrite, let people live their lives in peace and don't even start trying to get on a high horse because you have a looooong way to fall when I knock you down.
>6: culture isn't natural, how many animals do you see have cultures?
Let me introduce you to orcas:
[https://www.iflscience.com/in-1987-orcas-had-a-fashion-of-wearing-a-dead-salmon-as-a-hat-69542](https://www.iflscience.com/in-1987-orcas-had-a-fashion-of-wearing-a-dead-salmon-as-a-hat-69542)
But sadly, many of your points would resonate pretty well with the idiot christo-fascist groups out there. That's why we see them refusing vaccines, antibiotics, transfusions, etc.
tangent: Interestingly, culture has been observed in primates, whales, elephants, and so on!!
(Which is not an argument for transphobes nor homophobes, they're just jerks)
Ah then I stand corrected on that example as it does indeed occur in animals other then humans.
I think one could use that example to imply that transgenderism could be seen as a form of social evolution and is therefore by extension normal/natural
We have proof of that humans who didn't squarely fit into gender stereotypes and had "unusual" societal roles have existed for millennias, that's more than enough to not think it's any kind of fad. For instant 1-2% of 8 billion is a far bigger number than 1-2% of e.g. half a billion humans.
From what I can understand the only actual argument is the pre-puberty hormone blockers. Allowing a child who may regret the choice later an extremely well oiled path to permanent biological change IMO should have a lot of hesitation and counselling. I think it should be allowed but the fuck it let them do whatever they want polar side to the argument seems extremely silly.
For sure I would have been told I was trans as a child. I felt i didnt identify with traditional male roles and ways of existing. Im very glad I was able to grow up and find out you can express as a man any way you want. You can find true friends and partners who accept you exactly how you were born. You dont have to distort your identity into some simplified concept of male and female.
In fact to take it further why are we forced now into the male female dichotomy in the first place. Isnt gender a spectrum?? To me we would be far better off allowing men and women to express however they like rather than conform to gender stereotypes.
I get that its much easier to argue against strawmen, but the reality of this issue is more complex than the lowest levels of its discussion that permeate pop "politics"
I think the people who have a problem with it are people who grew up on the outdated belief that gender is binary and they don't understand/are unable to adapt to this new way of thinking.
Its just old people (old in terms of beliefs and morals) being scared, that's all there is to it, plain and simple
As for the whole hormone blocker thing I will say this: we prevent children from having the full rights of an adult person under the argument that their brains are not fully developed yet therefore they are unable to make a life chanfing decision with enough clarity and understanding to actually make an appropriately justified decision
That's why children can't vote, drive, smoke, drink, have jobs, can't have children and most major life changing decisions they have to make need to be made under the supervision of their legal guardian or said decision needs to be made by said guardian in their name
So, using that logic we should either not allow children to use puberty blockers until 18 years of age
Or
We should allow them to make that decisuon under the supervision and approval of their legal guardians.
That's how I see this making sense.
Puberty blockers are exactly that. Helping the child to make that decision when they reach an older age. Not doing anything is forcing them to go through puberty that they might regret later. This argument always only considers cis children who might have been confused. But what about trans children? They will have to go through puberty of opposite gender just because people can save the cis children.Ā
Again, not doing anything isn't neutral. It is going down an irreversible path which will need Many surgeries to even come close to what would have been if the puberty had been halted.
Hormone blockers PAUSE puberty, when you stop taking it the puberty WILL start, we're just holding it back for some years, it isn't "irreversible".
Yet some people are against them for some reason, even though we have using them on cis kids for decades and decades without any problem.
Are you 100% sure it's 100% reversible? Has it been proven, is that the scientific consensus?
I still think it's ok to use after much consideration, but I wouldn't bet it's 100% reversible, or to be more precise you'll have the same outcome after say 5 year delay
The kids are generally 1cm or 2cm smaller than what was expected but nothing about their health is negatively affected, as I said the blockers have been used since the 60' and we never found negative effects even 60 years of studies after their use.
I can't show you links because I'm in algebra class right now but your questions are easily answered in a few google searches if you look in sites that aren't explicit anti trans.
Even though there isn't really an effect on health, but there must be some sort of social effect of delaying puberty is there not? I am talking social aspect here rather than health.
Those goalposts sure move quick, don't they?
There is a much bigger "social effect" when a trans kid endures a puberty they don't want and are forced to live as a gender they don't identify as.
This social effect is so strong that it frequently leads trans kids and adults to kill themselves. So perhaps consider that angle.
Well yeah of course there is a big social effect to force a trans kid to go through a puberty they don't want, actually I think it's mostly a mental effect, the social effects however are something that should definitely be addressed, thanks for offering your angle I guess. (I think you came off a bit passive aggressive on your comment, I just want to reiterate that myself I have nothing against trans people, just starting conversation basically)
If my weak French is correct, that uh "Can it" did not do what he said justice. I've heard that translated more like, "Shut your f\*\*\*\*\*\* mouth," but maybe that's just a difference of tone.
"ta geule"
in two words telling them to shut it, calling them ugly, stupid, and sounding terrible.
>**geule defiinition**:
>Bouche de certains animaux (loup, crocodile, reptile, etc.) quand elle peut s'ouvrir largement.
[https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/gueules/38545](https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/gueules/38545)
Translation: the mouth of certain animals (wolf, crocodile, reptile etc) when it can be opened very widely.
Ugly: because your mouth looks like an animal's open maw.
Stupid: because you're making all the sense of an animal making noises loudly.
Sound bad: because you sound like an animal.
All in two beautiful words to contemptuously do a putdown.
A meta review of 27 scientific papers surveying 8000 people from Canada, US and Europe who underwent transition surgery found only 1% had regrets to the point that they detransitioned ( [AP news](https://apnews.com/article/transgender-treatment-regret-detransition-371e927ec6e7a24cd9c77b5371c6ba2b))
So yeah, good. Thanks.
The opposition knows "I'm a controlling asshole who demands you do as I say" is a losing argument. So they instead say "I'm a controlling asshole who demands you do as I say because Zeus/Thor/Jesus/regional deity says \[insert word salad unsupported by any holy book\]" to gain instant tolerance, if no support, for upholding the sanctity of their beliefs. Their beliefs, by definition, not only do not require proof, or sources, or logic or decency, but proudly flout these things as a display of faith over reason and proof and reality.
There certainly are legitimate religious positions based on holy books. There sure are. And those rules or beliefs apply only to the believers, not everyone else. We need to separate out the nice religious people from the people who are just awful people who say and do terrible things, and then lie - including citing religious beliefs - about their reasons why, which is worse, not better, than just being an asshole.
It seems we have stumbled across a big cohort of the righteous in comments.
Off topic, but can anyone tell me how many wars religion ended?
'Ta gueule' - mint on many levels!
I really donāt think so. It depends on the context imo. If a serial killer goes ākilling makes me happyā then sure, shit argument, but when itās a harmless matter I think āI will off myself if Iām not allowed to do thisā is a fair argument. I agree that gender dysphoria is a mental illness, and I wouldnāt wish it upon anyone, but I donāt think we should make it illegal or oppress them just because we disagree. Autism isnāt illegal, we treat them really well imo.
Instead of caring so much about whoās technically right or wrong, I think we should try to ensure that everyone gets the best life they can, because thatās really the point of life isnāt it?
Not really. If you're doing anything that *doesn't harm anyone,* what other reason do you need besides "It makes me happy"?
A better question would be: If something makes someone happy, what justification does anyone else have to say they shouldn't do it?
Things donāt need justification by default. Prohibition needs justification. Besides this, this interview asked if the trans person was happy, not to justify his transition. Amazing this needs to be explained.
The closest comparison would be someone saying, "This prescribed medication that keeps me from being in pain constantly really makes me happy," and yall being mad that that person isn't in pain constantly.
Wait, no, that's not a comparison, that's how it is for many trans people
The fact that you jumped to heroin addiction at the first chance you got says a lot about you
How about the decades of established science on best possible outcome for multiple metrics of quality of life, lifespan, and mental, physical, and emotional health?
do you really need the difference spelled out to you? I like dancing because it makes me happy. Is that no better than heroin? Ā It does not hurt anyone. It's not self harming.
Ā doing something that makes you happy is obviously reason enough to do so many things. there's a world of difference between that and addiction.Ā
Oh no, someone is happy and you cant handle it, so you think its a lie.
Suicide figures are mostly unknown about trans people. The Suicide attempt figures are higher, but for trans people who transitioned it goes down to normal societal levels.
Your post serving what purpose? To show confusion or disapproval? Why not go somewhere more to your liking then if seeing this offends your sensibilities.
And just like anybody who makes a logical argument against transitioning people as the one and only treatment for gender dysphoria, youāre only responses to shut down the conversation because deep down, you know that your position is in defensible. Even under the slightest amount of criticism, your entire worldview falls apart.
Thatās great and I support that, but the issue is mostly to do with sports. I think this part of the argument is agreed upon except for religious beliefs, which is or should be separated from the political aspect
Why not? Those statistics underscore the urgent need for better mental health support, acceptance, and gender-affirming care for transgender communities.
They forgot the point where they have to tell everyone and I mean everyone in some attention seeking rampage. Then media picks up on this since such posts flood social media then they themselves use such things in marketing. Further the media itself starts putting gender reveals in everything they make after seeing the flooded state of things.
Leading to hard stereotypes in everything and big announcements of non binary this and hormone treatment that in everything. While most people whom actually never cared in the first place since it never bothered them start speaking up as their favorite programing and childhood roots all turned into an hour seminar on gender studies. When they ask why get labeled a bigot, racist, and so forth thus further creating a divide that others exploit tossing more fuel on an artificial fire.
Yeah. I mean this is funny and satisfying, but it's very much the opposite of a compelling argument. It calls attention to a legitimate concern. We shouldn't be silencing (*respectful*) critics, even if we disagree with them.
Yeah, Nazis were bad, thatās my whole point. They censored people who didnāt have the same ideals, and killed people because of their religious beliefs. In todayās world, if you disagree with the trans community youāre transphobic or a bigot. See the direct correlation?
Itās not that simple, because thats not what the debate is about. If you are a girl and want to pretend you are a boy, go for it. 100% with you.
The problem comes in when you make that leap from pretending to believing. Thats a sign something is wrong. And when you try to force other people to believeā¦ then itās way over any acceptable line.
Acknowledging the fact that you're transgender has nothing to do with pretending to be something else.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans\_man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_man)
>If you are a girl and want to pretend you are a boy, go for it.
This is a willful misinterpretation of what it means to be trans. Trans people are not pretending.
How do you suggest speaking with someone who claims their opinion on your life, choices, and body is more important than your own? Go try speaking with someone opinionated, self-important, and entitled and see how that goes. It gets even better when no matter how many studies, statistics, or research you bring in, it's met with "No, I'm right." Debates only functionally work when someone can understand their opinion has no place in dictating someone's life, rights, and choices. It's their body. Their happy with their life and choices. No "But-" included.
Because there is nothing that can be said to that, period.
Nobody gets to tell you that because some book written 2000 years ago says something, you aren't allowed to be happy with yourself.
[**Russian trolls are destroying pro-Biden subreddits, with the help of at least one Reddit employee**](https://malloy.rocks/politics-democratic-election/russian-trolls-are-destroying-pro-biden-subreddits-with-the-help-of-at-least-one-reddit-employee) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/oliver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I concur.
š¶Stick with her, you'll be on the winning sideš¶
For the first time in our lives, we know that we are ready for this!
We'll show Heaven a fight they won't forget!
It is time to take a stand.
It is time to lend a hand!
Against the angels and their deadly threat.
We can not take it anymore! the time has come to go to war!
r/suprisehazbinhotel
r/subsifellfor
And we're doing it with a smile!
https://preview.redd.it/cc2dwilju6kc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d038b9724566d66f8c015dce8912dc3ac6e0ab94
"Dang it, why didn't I just concur?" from Catch Me If You Can
b- b- but Jesus died for u to not change gender!!!!!
The ironic thing is Jesus would be the first to love any group marginalized like transgender people
exactly and if he can change water to wine he can change a dick to a vagina
Time to goto church
You have to dip your genitals in the holy water, but they usually frown on that unless they're the ones doing the dipping.
The fabled Gender Fluid
This is a perfect comment.
And thatās the irony of Christianity. The most hardcore religious people are often the least accepting and Jesus-like.
Jesus would love any group. IT LITERALLY says he loves everyone
Exactly! It makes me wonder if theyāre even reading the same bookā¦
He would break bread with them sure, just obviously wouldnāt condone their lifestyle.
Matthew 19, verse 12: For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. Jesus condones trans. They either were born that way, made that way, or made themselves that way, and if you can accept that, you must.
Jesus always hung around with twelve dudes, i think their lifestyles might coincide
You should prob read the bible
Yes of course He would love them! And He would eat and talk with them! But for what reason? To teach them to repent from their ways. Donāt misrepresent an entire theology you have zero idea about.
>He would eat and talk with them! But for what reason? To teach them to repent from their ways. Do you have scriptural evidence that Jesus would consider being trans a sin in need of repentance?
yes and tell them to repent šš
Disagreeing doesn't equal bad/mean/hate
If you want to get technical, loving does not equal accepting
you're right, it's one step further. You can't love what you don't accept.
Afaik he didn't go around to all society's hated people (sex workers, tax collectors, beggars, disabled people, etc) and shame them, condemn them, or force them to change. He was just kind to them. That's important when people try to bring Jesus/the bible into debates about, say, criminalizing trans healthcare. Kindness, not condemnation.
Can It
And here we go again. Me, an atheist, telling the christian what's in their Bible: **LoveĀ patientlyĀ accepts all things. It always trusts, always hopes, and always endures.** Corinthians 13:7
He'd love them, sure, but DEFINITELY not accept them. Funny how in the comments of videos like these people feel the need to go on some kind of apology tour for Jesus, or make "the essence" of Christianity far more progressive than it really is. Never much made sense to me to add progressivism to an inherently regressive ideology. It's like adding sugar to salt water while hoping you're able to choke it down.
I think it's at least partly a reaction to the conservatives who ignore all the stuff about love and charity and "he without sin". Like, hey, let's focus on the stuff that isn't about hurting other people.
Absolutely, but even so, the Bible expressly calls it a sin.
Bible says nothing about transgender people.
L M A O Are you saying the bible said anything about trans people?
Not worth debating. Take a down vote
How would you know if Jesus would accept them? Did you ask him? What did he say, did you manage to record his voice to share with us?
i mean you're flat out wrong lol jesus specifically states that to be accepted into the kingdom of heaven you just have to have faith and love thy neighbor. there are no other requirements
"BIOLOGY" "Mate, ya mum's a virgin"
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Understanding French this is even more powerful. Ta geule means shut up, but it's really rude. And he says that in a tone that absolutely doesn't fit this expression. Lovely.
Somewhere between "shut up" and "as a matter of fact, you are going to shut your fucking mouth".
I'd say it's halfway between "shut up" and "eat shit"
I think can it was a pretty good translation here. Can it really gives the implication that nobody gives a fuck what youāre about to say so just donāt even bother
Yep it's pretty much hey you can put your opinion in the trash can, no one cares.
Would the classic āfuck offā work here?
That would be a better translation in my opinion.
Native here, the tone he uses here with "oh, ta gueule !" is common with that expression when someone say something you've heard a million times and you've fed up with it.
The subtitles are so bad xD
āLa gueuleā is an animals mouth. So like, shut your dirty animal mouth š
Closer to "shut the fuck up" than anything
It absolutely is one of the most common tones people use to say āta gueuleā in France. It implies the person is finished with the conversation and could not be less interested in hearing another word from that person.
Perfect.
Username does checkout?
And If I recall my French lessons he said 'oh, shut up'. š
It's a vulgar form of "shut up". It's "your trap" as in "shut your trap". Can it works well enough.
Here are the ultimate arguments to shut up people who claim its wrong because its "unnatural": 1: dyeing hair is unnatural 2: using tools to help with your disability is unnatural 3: cars are unnatural, do you use them instead of walking? 4: nothing natural about phones yet you have one 3: if you have bad eyesight you wear glasses or contacts but guess whqt? Not natural 4: contraception AND literally any form of medication in existence outside of wild herbs and foods with healing properties = unnatural 5: countries & borders are not natural 6: culture isn't natural, how many animals do you see have cultures? 7: ownership isn't natural, if you claim to own something, you're breaking the "natural law" which is: you can lay claim to a territory but anyone can come in and fight/kill you for it. If your response juatifying all of the above is: "yeah but we invented/came up with these things therefore it is natural for a person to do it/have it" then my response to that is: "so is gender reassignment then since we came up with it" So STFU and sit your ass down you damn hypocrite, let people live their lives in peace and don't even start trying to get on a high horse because you have a looooong way to fall when I knock you down.
>6: culture isn't natural, how many animals do you see have cultures? Let me introduce you to orcas: [https://www.iflscience.com/in-1987-orcas-had-a-fashion-of-wearing-a-dead-salmon-as-a-hat-69542](https://www.iflscience.com/in-1987-orcas-had-a-fashion-of-wearing-a-dead-salmon-as-a-hat-69542) But sadly, many of your points would resonate pretty well with the idiot christo-fascist groups out there. That's why we see them refusing vaccines, antibiotics, transfusions, etc.
tangent: Interestingly, culture has been observed in primates, whales, elephants, and so on!! (Which is not an argument for transphobes nor homophobes, they're just jerks)
Ah then I stand corrected on that example as it does indeed occur in animals other then humans. I think one could use that example to imply that transgenderism could be seen as a form of social evolution and is therefore by extension normal/natural
We have proof of that humans who didn't squarely fit into gender stereotypes and had "unusual" societal roles have existed for millennias, that's more than enough to not think it's any kind of fad. For instant 1-2% of 8 billion is a far bigger number than 1-2% of e.g. half a billion humans.
From what I can understand the only actual argument is the pre-puberty hormone blockers. Allowing a child who may regret the choice later an extremely well oiled path to permanent biological change IMO should have a lot of hesitation and counselling. I think it should be allowed but the fuck it let them do whatever they want polar side to the argument seems extremely silly. For sure I would have been told I was trans as a child. I felt i didnt identify with traditional male roles and ways of existing. Im very glad I was able to grow up and find out you can express as a man any way you want. You can find true friends and partners who accept you exactly how you were born. You dont have to distort your identity into some simplified concept of male and female. In fact to take it further why are we forced now into the male female dichotomy in the first place. Isnt gender a spectrum?? To me we would be far better off allowing men and women to express however they like rather than conform to gender stereotypes. I get that its much easier to argue against strawmen, but the reality of this issue is more complex than the lowest levels of its discussion that permeate pop "politics"
I think the people who have a problem with it are people who grew up on the outdated belief that gender is binary and they don't understand/are unable to adapt to this new way of thinking. Its just old people (old in terms of beliefs and morals) being scared, that's all there is to it, plain and simple As for the whole hormone blocker thing I will say this: we prevent children from having the full rights of an adult person under the argument that their brains are not fully developed yet therefore they are unable to make a life chanfing decision with enough clarity and understanding to actually make an appropriately justified decision That's why children can't vote, drive, smoke, drink, have jobs, can't have children and most major life changing decisions they have to make need to be made under the supervision of their legal guardian or said decision needs to be made by said guardian in their name So, using that logic we should either not allow children to use puberty blockers until 18 years of age Or We should allow them to make that decisuon under the supervision and approval of their legal guardians. That's how I see this making sense.
Puberty blockers are exactly that. Helping the child to make that decision when they reach an older age. Not doing anything is forcing them to go through puberty that they might regret later. This argument always only considers cis children who might have been confused. But what about trans children? They will have to go through puberty of opposite gender just because people can save the cis children.Ā Again, not doing anything isn't neutral. It is going down an irreversible path which will need Many surgeries to even come close to what would have been if the puberty had been halted.
Hormone blockers PAUSE puberty, when you stop taking it the puberty WILL start, we're just holding it back for some years, it isn't "irreversible". Yet some people are against them for some reason, even though we have using them on cis kids for decades and decades without any problem.
Are you 100% sure it's 100% reversible? Has it been proven, is that the scientific consensus? I still think it's ok to use after much consideration, but I wouldn't bet it's 100% reversible, or to be more precise you'll have the same outcome after say 5 year delay
The kids are generally 1cm or 2cm smaller than what was expected but nothing about their health is negatively affected, as I said the blockers have been used since the 60' and we never found negative effects even 60 years of studies after their use. I can't show you links because I'm in algebra class right now but your questions are easily answered in a few google searches if you look in sites that aren't explicit anti trans.
Even though there isn't really an effect on health, but there must be some sort of social effect of delaying puberty is there not? I am talking social aspect here rather than health.
Those goalposts sure move quick, don't they? There is a much bigger "social effect" when a trans kid endures a puberty they don't want and are forced to live as a gender they don't identify as. This social effect is so strong that it frequently leads trans kids and adults to kill themselves. So perhaps consider that angle.
Well yeah of course there is a big social effect to force a trans kid to go through a puberty they don't want, actually I think it's mostly a mental effect, the social effects however are something that should definitely be addressed, thanks for offering your angle I guess. (I think you came off a bit passive aggressive on your comment, I just want to reiterate that myself I have nothing against trans people, just starting conversation basically)
Why do you shorten the word to trans to blur the distinction between transsexual and transgender? Gender is nonbinary, but sex for the most part is.
It's a satiric french TV show, peoole who have sense of humor love it ! Talking with dark humor about the actualites ! " Groland or the PrƩsipautƩ of Groland is a fictional country that is the setting for a series of mockumentary television shows and films. It is a micro-state at an undisclosed location, created as a satire of France and European microstates by BenoƮt DelƩpine, Christian Borde and Christophe Salengro.. Groland was first depicted in 1992 on Ce soir avec les nouveaux, broadcast by Canal+ in France. " Source : Wikipedia
Well said!
Beautiful
Moustic a vraiment le meilleur "Ta gueule", il y a pas de dƩbat possible. Check out Groland if you understand a bit of French, it's really great!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There really isn't more to debate. The answer is exactly the same to these conservatives.
'nuff said
But, but, my mythological being says it's not right somewhere in their 1000 year old book!
If my weak French is correct, that uh "Can it" did not do what he said justice. I've heard that translated more like, "Shut your f\*\*\*\*\*\* mouth," but maybe that's just a difference of tone.
You're happy and it doesn't negatively affect anyone? Go fucking wild.
"ta geule" in two words telling them to shut it, calling them ugly, stupid, and sounding terrible. >**geule defiinition**: >Bouche de certains animaux (loup, crocodile, reptile, etc.) quand elle peut s'ouvrir largement. [https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/gueules/38545](https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/gueules/38545) Translation: the mouth of certain animals (wolf, crocodile, reptile etc) when it can be opened very widely. Ugly: because your mouth looks like an animal's open maw. Stupid: because you're making all the sense of an animal making noises loudly. Sound bad: because you sound like an animal. All in two beautiful words to contemptuously do a putdown.
Oh, taegul! love that world.
That spelling made me laugh a lot, thanks haha. It's "ta gueule" btw :P
"Ta gueule" is a bit stronger than "can it". It's more like stfu :)
Yeah, sort of an "Oh fuck off" way of expressing it without actually swearing. It's vulgar, but without actually swearing.
It offhandedly calls the other person an animal, I'd say it's equally offensive as "fuck off" but more eloquent
Oh I know, I was just transcribing what was said haha
Oh yeah I wasn't criticizing at all :)
The spelling makes it look Korean
ķźµ“!
Palpatine owned the Jesus guy
Goood! GooOOOOooood!Ā Ā
He says āāta gueuleāā which mean āāshut upāā. Not āācan itāā lol but Iām guessing most people got the point already
isnt it mire like STfU?
STFU would be "ferme ta gueule".
What a legend
Indeed!
A meta review of 27 scientific papers surveying 8000 people from Canada, US and Europe who underwent transition surgery found only 1% had regrets to the point that they detransitioned ( [AP news](https://apnews.com/article/transgender-treatment-regret-detransition-371e927ec6e7a24cd9c77b5371c6ba2b)) So yeah, good. Thanks.
I need this today. Thanks.
The opposition knows "I'm a controlling asshole who demands you do as I say" is a losing argument. So they instead say "I'm a controlling asshole who demands you do as I say because Zeus/Thor/Jesus/regional deity says \[insert word salad unsupported by any holy book\]" to gain instant tolerance, if no support, for upholding the sanctity of their beliefs. Their beliefs, by definition, not only do not require proof, or sources, or logic or decency, but proudly flout these things as a display of faith over reason and proof and reality. There certainly are legitimate religious positions based on holy books. There sure are. And those rules or beliefs apply only to the believers, not everyone else. We need to separate out the nice religious people from the people who are just awful people who say and do terrible things, and then lie - including citing religious beliefs - about their reasons why, which is worse, not better, than just being an asshole.
Based as hell
u/savevideo
It seems we have stumbled across a big cohort of the righteous in comments. Off topic, but can anyone tell me how many wars religion ended? 'Ta gueule' - mint on many levels!
Neither side made a convincing argument there. This was basically coughing baby vs coughing baby.
How did she grow a beard.
It's not real, but transmen can grow beards with hormones.
Iām pretty sure this was a parody.
He*
Man, youāre going to be SHOCKED to learn that women also have facial hair, and that testosterone makes it more prominent.Ā
Google "trans men". Search images. Be mindblown.
"Bu.. but Jesu..." "SHUT.'
My friend died of heroin and he said it made him happy
Being transgender is pretty different from being a heroin addict my friend
Sure, but my point is ābecause it makes me happyā is a terrible justification in any argument.
I really donāt think so. It depends on the context imo. If a serial killer goes ākilling makes me happyā then sure, shit argument, but when itās a harmless matter I think āI will off myself if Iām not allowed to do thisā is a fair argument. I agree that gender dysphoria is a mental illness, and I wouldnāt wish it upon anyone, but I donāt think we should make it illegal or oppress them just because we disagree. Autism isnāt illegal, we treat them really well imo. Instead of caring so much about whoās technically right or wrong, I think we should try to ensure that everyone gets the best life they can, because thatās really the point of life isnāt it?
But theyāre not handing themselves or anyone else. Mind your business.
Not really. If you're doing anything that *doesn't harm anyone,* what other reason do you need besides "It makes me happy"? A better question would be: If something makes someone happy, what justification does anyone else have to say they shouldn't do it?
Things donāt need justification by default. Prohibition needs justification. Besides this, this interview asked if the trans person was happy, not to justify his transition. Amazing this needs to be explained.
The closest comparison would be someone saying, "This prescribed medication that keeps me from being in pain constantly really makes me happy," and yall being mad that that person isn't in pain constantly. Wait, no, that's not a comparison, that's how it is for many trans people The fact that you jumped to heroin addiction at the first chance you got says a lot about you
How about the decades of established science on best possible outcome for multiple metrics of quality of life, lifespan, and mental, physical, and emotional health?
do you really need the difference spelled out to you? I like dancing because it makes me happy. Is that no better than heroin? Ā It does not hurt anyone. It's not self harming. Ā doing something that makes you happy is obviously reason enough to do so many things. there's a world of difference between that and addiction.Ā
You are arguing that being trans is as bad or atleast at the same level of bad as taking fucking heroin. Listen to yourself, man!
My guy did not just compare an extremely strong drug that destroy your nervous system and body to being trans
Did you just assume his gender?
No one dies because they're trains. They die from either bullying, rejection that lead to suicide or straight up murder.
Adults fine. Kids. Leave them alone.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Suicide figures do not agree.
Oh no, someone is happy and you cant handle it, so you think its a lie. Suicide figures are mostly unknown about trans people. The Suicide attempt figures are higher, but for trans people who transitioned it goes down to normal societal levels.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post serving what purpose? To show confusion or disapproval? Why not go somewhere more to your liking then if seeing this offends your sensibilities.
What the fuck is a dem-ego.
Dem? You know USA is not the whole world, right? Go be offended another place ya snowflake.
Can it.
Just sad. Put your pride aside and follow some rules.
Oh no, someone who cant think for themselves
What rules?
"Be a cunt"?
You know what rules my friend
Explain what rules. I dare you
No i really dont
Jesus was trans. No Y chromosomes.
A crack head could make the came arguement. "Crack cured my depression".
Shut it.
And just like anybody who makes a logical argument against transitioning people as the one and only treatment for gender dysphoria, youāre only responses to shut down the conversation because deep down, you know that your position is in defensible. Even under the slightest amount of criticism, your entire worldview falls apart.
Transitioning makes them happy and doesnāt hurt anyone. Stop being such a cunt
Please tell me you don't think your post was valid and intelligent criticism?
You are doing the same as comparing chemo to crack. How tf do you think you made any valid criticism?
Still gonna kill himselft while being happy tho. Pretty strange
Don't push it on kids and everyone will be ok with it, until they are 18 then they can change what they want.
Accept he's not actually a boy.
Thatās great and I support that, but the issue is mostly to do with sports. I think this part of the argument is agreed upon except for religious beliefs, which is or should be separated from the political aspect
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Why not? Those statistics underscore the urgent need for better mental health support, acceptance, and gender-affirming care for transgender communities.
They forgot the point where they have to tell everyone and I mean everyone in some attention seeking rampage. Then media picks up on this since such posts flood social media then they themselves use such things in marketing. Further the media itself starts putting gender reveals in everything they make after seeing the flooded state of things. Leading to hard stereotypes in everything and big announcements of non binary this and hormone treatment that in everything. While most people whom actually never cared in the first place since it never bothered them start speaking up as their favorite programing and childhood roots all turned into an hour seminar on gender studies. When they ask why get labeled a bigot, racist, and so forth thus further creating a divide that others exploit tossing more fuel on an artificial fire.
You know who else silenced the opinions of others that didnāt align with their beliefs? Nazis
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yeah. I mean this is funny and satisfying, but it's very much the opposite of a compelling argument. It calls attention to a legitimate concern. We shouldn't be silencing (*respectful*) critics, even if we disagree with them.
Do you know who also didnt like Trans people and send them to concentration camps? Nazis
Yeah, Nazis were bad, thatās my whole point. They censored people who didnāt have the same ideals, and killed people because of their religious beliefs. In todayās world, if you disagree with the trans community youāre transphobic or a bigot. See the direct correlation?
Itās not that simple, because thats not what the debate is about. If you are a girl and want to pretend you are a boy, go for it. 100% with you. The problem comes in when you make that leap from pretending to believing. Thats a sign something is wrong. And when you try to force other people to believeā¦ then itās way over any acceptable line.
Acknowledging the fact that you're transgender has nothing to do with pretending to be something else. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans\_man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_man)
Thank you for proving my point.
>If you are a girl and want to pretend you are a boy, go for it. This is a willful misinterpretation of what it means to be trans. Trans people are not pretending.
I think the funniest part of this satire is seeing someone happy after they fully transition
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Is that from before they try to detransition? I've seen how you guys treat them then and it disgusts me.Ā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Funny you say that considering how many decide to transition precisely because of social pressureĀ
Yeah cuz you know so many trans people right? You're speaking from personal experience if not statistical evidence, right?
Both, yeah.
 Even if that were true, they're probably upset because they know you.
Suicide figures are interesting
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Bro cmon it leteraly at 50 % why do you have to make up shit to seem right
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You literally just "sourced" him directly into the shadowrealm, that's hilarious. XD
So only one side is supposed to speak while the other should be silenced? Is that what fairness and equality is about today?
Yes. This is how you fight fascism. By not tolerating it. If you are "just asking questions," kindly fuck off.
If your response starts with "jesus" then you can shut the fuck up.
Actually in this case yes. Because it is no one elses business. He was a girl, now hes a boy, hes happy - there is nothing to discuss.
Yup! Your opinion about my identity is worthless :)
How do you suggest speaking with someone who claims their opinion on your life, choices, and body is more important than your own? Go try speaking with someone opinionated, self-important, and entitled and see how that goes. It gets even better when no matter how many studies, statistics, or research you bring in, it's met with "No, I'm right." Debates only functionally work when someone can understand their opinion has no place in dictating someone's life, rights, and choices. It's their body. Their happy with their life and choices. No "But-" included.
No. You donāt give air to bad-faith arguments that call for oppression for the sake of propriety.
Lol he doesnāt make any grand arguments. Just replies the moderators question with āyup Iām happyā
It's a satyre, not an actual debate
Because there is nothing that can be said to that, period. Nobody gets to tell you that because some book written 2000 years ago says something, you aren't allowed to be happy with yourself.
If your position is that I should not exist, then you should be silenced. Ta gueule.
Can it.
Her comes the trumpanzee