- 63 Posts
- 253 Comments
2·7 小时前Sometimes I take a second and remember everyone is allowed equal access to typing comments. Which is a good thing even though that includes some of the worst/most toxic people. Imagine the reaction if/when confronted by someone with actual ill intent. Having been covered in a bubble of non reality is gonna prove so detrimental.
You wouldn’t get it.
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
Okay buddy
The guy on the right was Croatian special forces before fighting and a legend in early MMA. The knockout happened at the tail end of his career 35wins-11losses. The guy on the left was a mid to low tier fighter 10wins-5losses that had the luck of landing a good shot at heavyweight. He’s since become a hyper cringe/annoying podcaster ““comedian”” in the Rogan-sphere. While the guy on the right served in his countries parliament as a democratic socialist after fighting.
14·10 小时前Bad news, 1. It’s impossible 2. They aren’t just on the web.
You give anyone applying that label with genuine cause a bad name and weaken its meaning.
The labels factually have been and are likely currently being used by the individual to commit predatory behavior in this specific case. Which is all I’m talking about. They used the fact that they are trans as a shield when they engaged in posting non consensual sexual drawings of irl people they knew. As well as floating the idea of becoming trans in order to sleep with women and avoid criticism. They used being autistic as a successful legal tactic to skirt a sex crime in the rape of their mother. You’re saying these should be omitted when talking about them though? Because bringing it up would be bigotry?
You wouldn’t get it
It’s relevant if its been used successfully in a court of law to defend a rape they commited. Or the individual in question has used being trans to excuse non consensual sexual deviance. This is a discussion about an individual not a group. Nuance and context are important. Also, don’t you think this individual would want at least those two labels applied to them? Wouldn’t including them be respectful of their wishes/identity? If expressing this text makes you think I’m a hateful transphobe you should definitely block me.
It’s relevant if its been used successfully in a court of law to defend a rape they commited. Or the individual in question has used being trans to excuse non consensual sexual deviance. This is a discussion about an individual not a group. Nuance and context are important.Also, don’t you think this individual would want at least those two labels applied to them? Wouldn’t including them be respectful of their wishes/identity? If expressing this text makes you think I’m a hateful transphobe you should definitely block me.
You’re ignoring context and nuance as a way to be offended. You’re the one that needs to get over yourself lmfao.
Ok buddy
So if someone is bad, erase the fact they are trans and never ever bring it up? But if they are good you’re allowed to reference it? Or are both situations equivalent to the N word somehow?