4 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

So you're happy that a child's genitals are mutilated without consent? 

Circumcision does not come close to the definition of 'mutilation' which implies severe damage and/or disfigurement, such as that inevitably caused by transgender "care-affirming" surgery.

13 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

Since it doesn't turn them into neuter freaks who need lifelong post-surgery treatment, I don't object to it.

So if your family was a member of a particular faith that required the chopping off of your ears, you would be fine with that because you would still be able to hear? 

Just now, GarryP said:

So if your family was a member of a particular faith that required the chopping off of your ears, you would be fine with that because you would still be able to hear? 

A pointless and ridiculous hypothetical question which goes straight into the waste-paper basket.

 

You may think it amusing to joke about widespread surgical mutilation carried out on children, but I don't.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Or so you assert.

 

Are you denying that RT is a propaganda arm of the Russian Government?

What Putin really thinks of LGBTQ+ starts at 2:53:40

I fully agree with his position.

 

It's from Euronews with link, so it must be true.

But it's a question from RT to president Vladimir Putin at his annual speech of 23.11.2021.

 

https://www.euronews.com/2021/12/23/ukraine-and-covid-on-the-agenda-as-putin-delivers-annual-speech

 

2 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

A pointless and ridiculous hypothetical question which goes straight into the waste-paper basket.

 

You may think it amusing to joke about widespread surgical mutilation carried out on children, but I don't.

So, where does that happen? It's so widespread I've missed it.

17 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

So you're happy that a child's genitals are mutilated without consent? 

I am very happy with it and glad my parents made the decision to remove unwanted skin that would someday prevent me from experiencing the best sex of my life.

8 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

Circumcision does not come close to the definition of 'mutilation' which implies severe damage and/or disfigurement, such as that inevitably caused by transgender "care-affirming" surgery.

Circumcision is certainly disfigurement, as part of the penis is severed. But the point I was making is that no consent is obtained from a minor to do this which is something that you seem to be opposed to for other procedures. Moreover there are mostly no medical grounds for this, it's done for religious purposes.

https://www.breitbart.com/t/assets/html/disqus-21.html?udca=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fpolitics%2F2023%2F10%2F04%2Ftransgenderism-report-602-girls-canada-breasts-cut-off%2F|25116777|Transgenderism%3A Report Says 602 Underage Canadian Girls Had Breasts Cut Off|

 

Seems that feminism is dead. Read some of the comments for an understanding of what the public thinks about mutilation.

5 minutes ago, Screaming said:

I am very happy with it and glad my parents made the decision to remove unwanted skin that would someday prevent me from experiencing the best sex of my life.

Good job you grew up straight then or you'd be cursing them.  ???? 

5 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

So, where does that happen? It's so widespread I've missed it.

You'd probably miss an alien invasion.

 

Transgender Inc. is hardly backwards in advertising its "products".

Just now, Eleftheros said:

You'd probably miss an alien invasion.

 

Transgender Inc. is hardly backwards in advertising its "products".

Please answer the question.

 

I repeat, I've heard nothing about the widespread mutilation that you speak of. 

It should be an interesting read. Please point me in the direction of where I can find the facts. 

 

Thanks.

2 minutes ago, Screaming said:

https://www.breitbart.com/t/assets/html/disqus-21.html?udca=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fpolitics%2F2023%2F10%2F04%2Ftransgenderism-report-602-girls-canada-breasts-cut-off%2F|25116777|Transgenderism%3A Report Says 602 Underage Canadian Girls Had Breasts Cut Off|

 

Seems that feminism is dead. Read some of the comments for an understanding of what the public thinks about mutilation.

Comments sections are the rat-holes of  the internet. It's Breitbart  but  I guess I will hold my  nose and read it.

Just now, youreavinalaff said:

I repeat, I've heard nothing about the widespread mutilation that you speak of. 

Read back through the thread and the links are there.

7 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

Read back through the thread and the links are there.

Well, that was a waste of time. You must have been leading me on a merry dance.

 

There are no links reporting widespread mutilation.

 

Please point me in the direction of the articles you've read.

 

Thanks.

On 9/28/2023 at 10:36 AM, retarius said:

He's right you know. Viva Vivek

Vote Trump 24

 

You KNOW it makes sense.

42 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

A pointless and ridiculous hypothetical question which goes straight into the waste-paper basket.

 

You may think it amusing to joke about widespread surgical mutilation carried out on children, but I don't.

And circumcision isn't mutilation which serves no physical purpose for the vast majority of males? It should only be done in the case of medical necessity. Hence the comparison. 

On 10/6/2023 at 7:28 PM, Baht Simpson said:

You replied 2 minutes after my post so you obviously haven't read it.  Rather pathetic to criticize don't you think?  

If someone posted a link to a Phillip Morris article about of the benefits smoking, would you read it? 

 

In any event, I do not read anything that anyone links to that they have not summarized, as it is a clear indication that they have likely not read it themselves. 

On 10/6/2023 at 7:38 PM, Baht Simpson said:

Lol. Well I don't think the Inquisition, Aztec Priests or Mengele had a 97% approval rating from their customers. Please don't be silly.

Indeed. Had the Aztec Priests had wide support, millions of Aztecs could not have been conquered by a few thousand Spaniards. 

Edited October 8, 20232 yr by Yellowtail
clarity

6 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If someone posted a link to a Phillip Morris article about of the benefits smoking, would you read it? 

 

In any event, I do not read anything that anyone links to that they have not summarized, as it is a clear indication that they have likely not read it themselves. 

In answer to your question, if I was going to respond and/or criticize, then always. otherwise I would appear foolish.

 

If you had bothered to read the article you would see that many of the facts listed are linked to government statistics to support those facts, which is how I like it.

 

I'm not trying to score points, I just find it irksome when people just swipe away a response without reading it. 

 

I'm pretty sure that if Philip Morris had provided fact checks I would have read them. 

On 10/6/2023 at 9:00 PM, youreavinalaff said:

You chose mainstream media and YouTube to get your facts?

 

That explains alot.

You do understand that Youtube is only a conduit, and getting facts from Youtube is like getting them from "the printed word", or from "the interweb" or, like when I was growing up, from "the newspaper".

 

2 hours ago, impulse said:

You do understand that Youtube is only a conduit, and getting facts from Youtube is like getting them from "the printed word", or from "the interweb" or, like when I was growing up, from "the newspaper".

 

Exactly my point.

 

I prefer to go to the source. Not the second hand publisher.

There is a massive problem in Western politics today, pushing confused kids to have irreversible and very painful mutilating surgeries, as well to take puberty blockers which cause an array of very serious medical problems, is evil and sick beyond words.

 

 

On 9/30/2023 at 9:12 AM, ozimoron said:

Tomorrow. Unless I see certain posts disappear, I'm out.

Fantastic news.

On 9/29/2023 at 8:34 AM, BritManToo said:

Would point out transgenders aren't homosexuals, therefor people that don't like them aren't homophobes.

That would depend where their sexual preferences are.  If a birth male, is now a transwomen, but only has sex with males, then he is definitely a homosexual.  Simply enjoys living as a woman.

 

That's the part I don't get.  Do we need a new 'trans' designations.  What was wrong with simply being gay/lesbian or bisexual.

 

Those 3 cover all the alternative lifestyles.  No need for trans-anything or cis  and non binary BS.

 

Just more of 'look at me', I'm different ... NO you're not.

 

Straight, homosexual or bisexual ... PICK ONE

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

That's the part I don't get.  Do we need a new 'trans' designations.  What was wrong with simply being gay/lesbian or bisexual.

 

Those 3 cover all the alternative lifestyles.  No need for trans-anything or cis  and non binary BS.

Male, female and mentally ill also covers all options without being homophobic.

No need to include anyone's sexual preferences.

Edited October 9, 20232 yr by BritManToo

Don't agree with mentally ill, but agree, male & female is all the labels, subcategories needed for Homo-sapiens.