Let us not forget certain fascists who claimed they’d outlaw all trans people and force them to detransition.
Let us not forget how many trans people have died at the hands of bigots.
Let us not forget how many trans people have died at the hands of bigots.
It is not through silence and imposition that healthy social order changes. Demands are made while little public discourse has even taken place and the more friction that creates the more those demanding feel vindicated, the more rejection fosters.
It seems like rather than changing hearts, the trans movement decided it was in the right and set itself to impart justice, whether the public understands it or not. Not quite fascistic, definitely totalitarian, that makes it way closer to actual fascism than anything that is often pointed as such though. Shame.
I didnt support censorship either. You created a strawman that i couldnt respond due to the sheer volume of downvotes.
I support people expressing their thoughts freely so that I know who is dangerous, and who is not. Who has a disdain for my mere existence, and who is willing to stand in support of minorities.
The reality is that bigots will only get emboldened, as they have, and it’s not due to censorship, it’s due to strawmans and falsehoods pushed by prominent bigots.
I merely pointed to bigots killing people, and to prominent politicians who embolden the bigots, and rally them under a false flag, under a supposedly “holy” cause, under the so-called protection of conservative values.
Shame on you, for jumping to conclusions and creating strawmans.
Forcing people to guess should be avoided, especially since not everyone is where you’re from. Links to examples are also helpful.
Apparently stating facts is worthy of downvotes. Keep it classy HN.
I don't think this is the case, since there were no facts presented. Your guess seems to differ from the other person [1], which proves that some clarity would have helped the discussion.
Whether you are unaware of it or not doesn’t make them not true.
As the commenter said, google is your friend.
https://www.axios.com/2023/01/31/trump-transgender-rights-lg...
> It's not useful, to anyone
What's not useful to everyone is acting like you don't read the news, can't read the news, or in the event that someone points out something in the news that you didn't, that you somehow cannot be availed of that knowledge in a way that doesn't render the argument moot. It's really stupid when you think about it that way.
Plus, aren't we supposed to be making the effort of understanding each other here. Sitting in ignorance to insist you can't think of a single example isn't really making that effort.
> It's almost like it's used to preemptively set up a fight, with responses similar to yours, like "Well, you're not paying attention" or "How could you not know?".
A stage was set where people can easily be placed into a box, created by an intentional lack of clarity. They can then be easily attack for not seeing things "as clearly" as they should. It's not possible for anything positive to come out of an exchange built in that context. By that, it's not useful, unless your goal is actually to create a negative exchange.
I'll also claim to know the next part of the pattern, but I don't think you can complete the pattern, somewhere like this, and it definitely involves misplaced assumptions.
> we are supposed to try to make an effort to understand each other.
My first comment was asking for clarification, so discussion could be had. You made no efforts, and resisted, until now.
> I will repeat my point that when discussing a particular element of the news
As my first comment stated, the problem is that no particular element was discussed. I suggest re-reading this thread.
The rest of your post is a textbook example of gaslighting, so I'm choosing to remove myself from this thread now. But, I sincerely wish the best for you.
No change in my tone nor my point.
>My first comment was asking for clarification, so discussion could be had. You made no efforts, and resisted, until now.
I literally offered an example that fit.
>As my first comment stated, the problem is that no particular element was discussed. I suggest re-reading this thread.
Yawn.
>The rest of your post is a textbook example of gaslighting, so I'm choosing to remove myself from this thread now. But, I sincerely wish the best for you.
Be gaslight, then. It's all projection from you anyway.
It seems that any criticism of the republican leadership results in a horde of bigots mass flagging and downvotes which then prevents me from responding to attacks and responses.
Dealing with the bullshit and falsehoods always takes a lot more time than it takes to discredit facts, and HN’s approach with flagging does not help.
As a matter of fact, I had a comment where i paraphrased Popper almost word for word regarding the paradox of tolerance, and then quoted Trump saying he wants to outlaw trans people, and i got flagged.
It took for @dang to come and unflag me.
The Utah law "prohibits health care providers from providing hormonal transgender treatments to minors and those not diagnosed with gender dysphoria".[1]
That's not the same thing at all.
[1]: https://healthnews.com/news/utah-limits-access-to-gender-aff...
That’s simply a single edge jump from “Utah GOP” to GOP.