Are yall gay men who support trump
-
@blablarg18 said in Are yall gay men who support trump:
@PedrocaWest said in Are yall gay men who support trump:
The rest of the world only allow trans teens to have hormone replacement and any surgical body modification after 16 and 18, specifically
Means:
-
USA policy is wrong
-
To argue against USA policy is right
again, thank you !!!!!!!
you just endorsed what I doUsually the right answer is "US is wrong. Period."
Your elections can be resumed in Wrong vs. Wronger.
-
-
"Layla Jane is a biological female who sought mental health treatment at age 12 for various emotional and behavioral issues. Various Kaiser doctors, rather than give Layla Jane the care she needed, seized on her confusion about her gender and placed her on the âgender affirming careâ pipeline with a series of damaging transgender treatments, including off-label puberty and cross-sex hormones. Layla Janeâs doctors removed her breasts when she was just 13 years old."
https://www.dhillonlaw.com/lawsuits/layla-jane-v-kaiser-hospital-foundation-inc/
& then Manchester-Pride douche not only mocks family loss, but, fully informed of family loss, attacks family to their face as "you stupid twat, you stupid piece of shit, why would you care?"
& then @PedrocaWest excuses douche as fair if he's uninformed of family loss - except excuse fails, because right on video, douche was too informed.
-
@blablarg18 I've already said in the other topic, if you are talking about trans people:
Proihibiting genital surgeries in underage people, specially intersex infants, this is a big thing both trans and intersex movement advocate and no one never hears them. On the contrary, they accuse them of it
Giving psycological and psychiatric support for gender questioning kids/teens and their parents. Both for them understand everything better, as for them to not mistook feminine boys and tomboys for trans kids and for parent give actual support for their queer kids.
Allowing kids and teens to "live the phase" if this is a phase, allowing them to go through social transition (different clothers, hairstyles and pronous/names, just it) so they can have sure if they are really trans and if it feels right.
Stop criminalizing parents, teachers and doctor who support trans people.
Puberty blockers to gender-questioning pre-teens, so they can mature enough to know better at 16yo or 18yo. This avoids unnecessary or aggresive surgeries and cosmetic procedures. Layla Jane herself would not have undergone a mastectomy if she had been given puberty blockers, as this would have put her breast growth on hold until she was certain whether or not she was trans.
It would even end the "omg, there's a trans woman in women sports" panic, there would be no supposed advantage if the male puberty never occurred.
Also, stronger and neutral studies to proven the real advantages (or not) of trans women in sports, because when people debate they think trans women keep the strength that they had when they were cis men, and thats already something proven wrong in more than a centary of studies with hormonal treatment in cisgender and intersex people. Lia Thomas, that you created a topic just some hours ago, became a big thing when they said she was winning everything, but she losed way more times than she won and had a very unstable record after transition, so people would really be aeare if she had any real advantage in certain swim categories or if it was just a fuss led by prejudice or ignorance.
Aside from all of this, better ways to support adults that realize later that they are trans, Caitlyn Jenner is a anti-trans transgender woman and she realizes she only started transition after 65yo, a lot of people only realize or are free enough to do the transition after they passed their 30s and reached life stability.
Also, the possibility to keep their reproduction rights, because not all trans people have gender dysphoria with their genitals, and some places require them to be neutered to allow full legal transition.
And, of course, stoping the "trans panic laws" that allow people in some US states to kill trans people if they claim that they feel threatened by them.
People usually enter this debate pratically saying "trans people are the devil" or "pronouns will destroy the language" instead of hear them. It's way easier to support, pay attention and give care to avoid mistakes than fighting and criminalizing an entire group. It is only happening because it's not cool anymore hating gays, so they passed to the next letter of our alphabet mafia. And they will keep going to the next letters even if they ended with transness.
-
Just to clarify: Layla Jane, & guy's gender-troubled niece who died, are 2 people.
I never said they were same. Both appear to be victims of genderqueer.
But I could have confused details of which traumas happened to precisely which victims. Apologies for any confusion on that level.
Layla Jane lives!
-
@PedrocaWest the "trans panic laws" that allow people in some US states to kill trans people if they claim that they feel threatened by them.
Fiction.No such law has been proposed or passed in USA.
Lib "Department of Imaginary Concerns"
If you mean some criminal cases had "trans panic defense" to them - ok - but give specifics. also note, ever-increasing bans on it
-
@blablarg18 Oh, ok, I thought she passed away.
Who was the other person? -
@blablarg18 Oops, I worded that wrong. What I meant is that in a lot of U.S. states, people can still use whatâs called the âtrans panicâ defense in court.
Basically, someone commits violence (often murder), and then says, âI freaked out when I found out they were transâ â and uses that emotional reaction to try to get a lighter sentence, like manslaughter instead of murder. Itâs a legal loophole that can make violent acts seem more âunderstandableâ to a jury.
Thatâs why some states have passed laws to ban that defense entirely. Because itâs been used in real cases. Successfully.
But in most states? Itâs still allowed. You can literally argue in court that someone being trans âprovokedâ you into killing them.
So yeah, not fiction. Not imaginary. Just a messed-up part of the system thatâs yet to get fixed.
-
@blablarg18 and you agree with me that they should ban "trans panic defense" in all states?
VocĂȘ Ă© TUGA ou HUE BR?
Do you wanna talk?
Me adiciona! Bora causar juntos. -
its a fad thing.... fashionable to be contrarian and oh so special loving trump when clearly he is a fools choice. They are all shit. Both sides. The system is fucked until theres a third or more party. Trump was never the actual answer to the problems but a symptom of what a terrible system puked out in one red hat wearing gasbag.
America is fucked till we get more parties.
-
@PedrocaWest Yet again, you agree with what I said. Thanks!
@cp2000 Congratulations, you just advocated for America First / MAGA.
Republican-Democrat "Uniparty" is stupid & fucked.... I agree, have said it across thousands of posts.
-
@PedrocaWest said in Are yall gay men who support trump:
@blablarg18 and you agree with me that they should ban "trans panic defense" in all states?
Are you saying that trans people should be allowed to lie to their sex partners about what is between their legs?
To me, that's a form of rape.
-
We could establish fascist panic defense, an individual was seized by an uncontrolled fit of rage upon discovering that his lover was a pro-Trump transphobic. To me fuck with a closeted trumpist it's a form of rap.
-
How pathetic.
Your bullshit example isn't the same as a straight guy having sex with a person he though was a woman, only to have the "woman's" dick fall out of her panties. Likewise, for a gay guy to think he's having sex with a man, only for her to say "eat my pussy" or a lesbian to think she's having sex with another woman, only for him to say "ride my cock".
I know, that's too complicated a concept for liberals to understand.
It's funny how under Obama it became acceptable for women to be able to claim rape for sex they later regretted for whatever reason, but people like you can't understand the concept of rape by omission or deceit.
BTW, real trans people agree that they should be honest with their sex partners. Not surprisingly, only the Queers say it's acceptable to lie about it. Then again, Queers are easy to spot.
Next, you'll claim that sex with little kids is ok, because you hate Trump.
-
@raphjd I didn't said it, but you understood it. So your way to read this is the problem, not what I said.
Someone who formerly already knew the person was trans and dated them to do a hate crime could just claim he didn't knew in bad faith, just to avoid a heavier sentence, it was already used in trials lots of times and that why it was banned in a lot of places, the same thing that occurred with "gay panic" defence acts.Sometimes trans people don't have "whats was between their legs" anymore, so the agressor panicked based on a ghost in his head or because they thought it would make them less of a men if they fucked a pussy from someone that was not a woman since birth.
It's not rape to the law, except if the person actually rapes the other one, it can be judged at the most as a sexual fraud and it would be a loooong trial to prove the intention of fraud.
And this becomes way more fucked up if you remember that people says they can always spot who is trans and who's not. So it's a weak or shameless defence strategy.
People forget that even when they are with another person naked in a room they can always say 'I don't wanna do this anymore" and leave. If the other still want it the other person is a jerk and it would become a rape. And it is valid to all cases, not only trans related ones.
You saying it this way make you look like you agree they should beat or murder someone because they panicked. Is that what you think?
-
@raphjd Agree. Maybe end "trans panic defense" and "trans lying offense", as related pair.
Self-defense claims are based 1. proportionality, 2. how "average reasonable person" should perceive threat level, BUT, 3. jury allowed to decide both.
If someone gets raped by force, can they kill attacker? Why? or why not? or when? at what point?
If someone is raped by deceit / fraud - When does that crime, and ethically it is crime, rise to level of being raped by force?
Or, as when woman regrets after she fucked like whore: should claim be disallowed - because it is too easy to abuse?
Do we allow tindr / grindr people to lie about age? dick size? income? origins? HIV status?
I don't know. I pose questions.
But gender isn't sex - gender is how you feel & present, while sex is your chromosomes & how you cum.
To lie about your basic sex, does feel worse than lie about your age.
As healthy Gay dude, I never want to date anyone without at least 1 testicle, at least 1 Y choromosome, & prostate & dick both work. Sorry - it's true tho.
I can totally see, if healthy Straight dude feels same way about genuine tits, XX, & ovary / no dick or testicles.
-
@blablarg18 I need to say, I like it more when we actually talk instead of we fight based in pre made ideas of each other.
I believe sexual fraud is already a crime in most places, right?
Like you said, proportionality matters.
If a guy goes to Thailand and finds out a lady is a ladyboy, most of the time heâll just say, âOh, I thought you were cis, sorry, Iâm not into this,â and leave. Thatâs sexual preference. Plenty of gay and straight men respect trans people but just arenât into certain bodies, and thatâs totally fine. No one should be forced into anything.
Now, if someone is actually raped, and I mean real rape, not âI changed my mind afterâ, self-defense is justified, even if it ends in death.
But in cases of sexual fraud, thatâs something courts can deal with. The person who lied could end up with a criminal record and be forced to pay damages, and the victim gets justice without committing a violent crime.
In cases of deceit or fraud, weâre talking about something very different. It might be hurtful, unethical, even criminal depending on the situation, but itâs not a direct physical threat that justifies a violent response. Thatâs why we have the legal system. You sue. You file charges. You donât stab someone.
(and we have some laws about HIV status, people are allowed to hide it, but they are not allowed to pass the IST).
And you're right, it can be tricky. There are gray areas. People lie on dating apps all the time, about age, status, income, even intentions. And yeah, some of that crosses ethical lines, especially if it affects consent. But we donât condone violence in response to those either. We deal with it through law, not fists. That "something panic" logic has been used to justify beatings and worse. So we need to be really careful not to start recycling it with a new target.
About sex and gender, I get your preferences, and youâre totally entitled to them, I have mine too and I think most of gay have their own even with cis dude, some are into hunks, or into twinks, or into daddies, os tops only, or bottom-only, or have a kink for something ythat is not a general kink.
Also, we need to remember that some cis men with testicles and dicks donât have a Y chromossome, nature is weird and nobody asks a chromossome testing to anyone except in very specific cases.
And I think you are the first person with a previous transphobic pov who already knew the difference between gender and sex, most of them claim both are the same, that's exausting to keep correcting, thank you for not making me repeat it.
We all agree: no one should ever be pressured to have sex with someone theyâre not into. Period.
But thatâs not what most of these "trans panic" defenses are about. Theyâre not about preference, theyâre about using someoneâs identity as an excuse for dehumanization and crime, and thatâs where it turns ugly.
No one's saying lies can't be harmful. But not all harm justifies violence. And not all lies are big lies or harmful (switches that are bottoms are proof of this). The right place to deal actual with deceit, sexual or otherwise, is the justice system. Otherwise weâre justifying chaos.
VocĂȘ Ă© TUGA ou HUE BR?
Do you wanna talk?
Me adiciona! Bora causar juntos. -
"In the heat of the moment" is a defense or mitigation that can be used. The most common is when a guy comes home and catches his wife fucking another man, so he harms them. I can see that gender fraud could have he same thing.
California ended the law that criminalized the intentional spreading of HIV/AIDS and STDs/STIs without telling the other person. I don't remember his name, but a state-level Senator is pushing to liberalize California's sex laws.
The 1999 movie Boys Don't Cry (true story & Hilary Swank won an Oscar for it) the trans man was accused of fucking the girls, but it was with her fingers or a dildo. She was tortured and killed.
How do you view what she did, since it was physical penetration through fraud. The victim's brother and brother's friend(s) did the torture and killing.
-
How about a legal system that prevents rapists from being deported?
How about a legal system that says that a rapist won't go to prison because his culture is different?
How about a legal system where you get more time for a mean social media post than rapists do?
How about a legal system where men who rape women and kids instantly become trans (no transition other than clothes) so they get sent to a women's prison so they have a steady pool of victims?
How about a legal system where 1 religion has many protections, but the rest don't, especially Jewish?
How about a legal system that allows homophobia, transphobia, etc, etc, if based on religious beliefs, but criminalizes hatred of religion if it's based on how the religion treats LGBTs?
This is the UK, but a lot of it applies throughout the west.
-
@raphjd You're kind of proving my point here - again.
We started off talking about how generalizing the worst cases from a group leads to dangerous, unfair treatment of the whole group. And now youâre listing every exaggerated or exceptional case you can find, often out of context, to justify your mistrust of trans people or liberal systems.
Letâs unpack this a bit.
Yes, "heat of the moment" can sometimes be used as a legal defense in extreme cases, but it's not a free pass for violence, especially not murder. Thatâs why we have courts, judges, and due process. Comparing finding your partner cheating to discovering someone is trans without your prior knowledge is a false equivalence. One is betrayal within an existing relationship, the other is often a reflection of a cultural stigma where trans people are still afraid for their lives just for being honest.
You brought up Boys Donât Cry. Do you really want to use a brutal, real-world case of torture and murder to argue against the victim, a trans man? Even if you question his choices, you know that nothing in that story justifies the violence he suffered. That wasnât about âsexual fraudâ, that was about deep-seated hatred, and you're dangerously close to excusing it.
You also keep bringing up legal flaws, yes, some of them are real. The idea that rapists declare themselves trans to abuse the system is concerning, and it should be investigated. But again: fix the law, donât demonize trans people as a group. Thatâs the whole point. In a functioning society, left and right should come together to say âHow do we protect people without trampling others?â, not âLetâs punish an entire minority because someone took advantage of a loophole.â
Same goes for religious exemptions. I agree that no religion should be above criticism, and no one should be allowed to justify hate or abuse based on âfaith.â But instead of that being a reason to target a specific religion or minority, it should be used as a reason to ensure equality under the law, no double standards, no matter who you are.
You say people get more time for tweets than for rape. If thatâs true, then the problem is with the sentencing system, not with trans people, or queer people, or Muslims, or liberals in general. Reform should be based on fairness, not fear or resentment.
And letâs be honest: many of these stories you bring up sound cherry-picked, and the way you frame them makes it hard to tell whatâs fact, whatâs tabloid distortion, and whatâs personal bias. The idea that "liberals" created a system where "scum" gets protected and law-abiding people are oppressed? Thatâs a convenient but simplistic narrative. In reality, every political side has flaws, but when your answer to every social challenge is âblame the left,â it stops being analysis and starts sounding like ideology.
Iâm not saying you donât raise real issues. Iâm saying you use those issues to build a wall of distrust, and then you pretend that anyone who disagrees must be naive, blind, or corrupt.
We can talk about reform. We can talk about fixing flaws in the law. But if you keep using those flaws as weapons to paint entire groups, especially already vulnerable ones, as villains, then youâre not fighting injustice, youâre repeating the exact same logic people once used to justify criminalizing gay men like you and me.
And I donât think thatâs who you really want to be.
-
@raphjd You know, Iâve been thinking, the way you argue reminds me a lot of someone whoâs been let down too many times by the same kind of people. And I get the impression that, deep down, you really do want the world to be fair, ordered, and honest. That youâre tired of hypocrisy, tired of manipulation, tired of people using identity as a shield for bad behavior. Thatâs actually pretty reasonable.
But hereâs the thing, I think youâve let a few very specific, bad stories convince you that the whole world is rigged against you, or that a huge group of people (like queer folks, trans people, Muslims, liberals, whoever) is fundamentally dishonest. And thatâs just not true.
The way you talk about trans people now is really similar to how religious conservatives used to talk about us, gay men, a couple decades ago. Remember how they'd say, "I donât hate gays, just the ones who push it in peopleâs faces or corrupt the youth"? Or "Sure, love who you love, but I donât want it in schools or bathrooms"? It always sounded like they were drawing lines, but when it came time to make laws, those lines disappeared, and we were all treated like predators.
Now youâre doing the same thing to trans people. Saying you respect ârealâ trans folks, but then spending 99% of your energy attacking the very idea that they exist, or treating every legal loophole or outlier as a reason to suspect them all. Thatâs not protecting society, thatâs painting targets.
You say you're just raising questions, and okay, sure, questions are valid. But itâs hard to ignore that they only ever seem to point in one direction. You rarely raise questions about the gay rapists or serial killers out there. Why not? Weâve got our share of fucked-up people too. Every group does. But we donât let those few define the whole. Thatâs the whole point of justice, individual accountability. Not punishment by category.
And look, when you expand the conversation to other groups, immigrants, Muslims, liberals, it starts to feel like you're not just upset about one issue. Itâs like you're trying to stack grievances until it justifies writing off half the world. Thatâs what a lot of people in the US are doing right now. Everything becomes part of a culture war, and thereâs no room left for just fixing problems like adults.
Because yeah, some of those UK laws you mentioned? They were messy. And in some cases, they were actually corrected. Some loopholes were closed. The prison system is changing its gender policies. Parents were right to raise questions about letting kids make medical decisions too early. Thatâs all part of how a healthy society works, people push, others push back, and the system adjusts. Itâs slow and imperfect, but it's not a plot to destroy civilization.
But when you frame everything as âliberals protecting rapistsâ or âtrans people invading womenâs spacesâ or âMuslims ruining the UK,â then no correction will ever be good enough. Because you're not aiming for solutions, you're aiming for enemies.
I think youâve been radicalized a bit, honestly. Not in the dangerous way, but in the âalways on edge, always ready to prove something, always suspiciousâ kind of way. And maybe, just maybe, some of that anger you have toward liberals or queer activists is really just disappointment at the way the world has handled you. That would make a lot of sense. Youâre gay, youâve lived in two countries, and youâve probably had to deal with a lot of bullshit from all directions. I donât blame you for being guarded.
But I do think youâre shooting in the wrong direction.
And if youâve read this far, thatâs already more than most people would do. So thanks for that.
Say to me how much of this is right if you feel like it.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đ
Register Login