User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 76

Thread: Hillary Clinton Questions Transgenderism, Left Meltdown Ensues

  1. #21
    Points: 70,304, Level: 64
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 646
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first Group50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    IMPress Polly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    153652
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vermont, USA
    Posts
    6,016
    Points
    70,304
    Level
    64
    Thanks Given
    6,253
    Thanked 5,073x in 2,984 Posts
    Mentioned
    541 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    It makes perfect sense. She's a career politician who's still entertaining the idea of a 2020 campaign. Do you think someone like Hillary Clinton just decides to "keep it real"? Quite frankly, as a horrible a candidate as she might be...I mean have you seen this 2020 clown show? Now I don't think she'll actually run but she will most definitely try to make herself relevant.


    Outlawing single-sex public spaces is perfectly in keeping with the notion of equality but I've noticed how quickly "feminists" abandon their supposed principles. Anyway, it's called pandering, Polly. Yeah, it sucks when you're not the squeakiest wheel but the time has come when all off these ridiculous interest groups that coalesced around what used to be a working class party could no longer be accommodated. It's the Victim Olympics and the best you can hope for this year is the Bronze.
    I'm just going to say this once: the people who are currently anticipating another Hillary Clinton presidential campaign are all the same geniuses who also predicted that she wouldn't run for president in 2016 and that Mitt Romney would. Mark my words: she will not run. People, and especially people who plan to vote for Trump anyway, really just want this to be a more exciting nominating battle than it actually is because what's actually happening is just that the most boring and predictable candidate, Joe Biden, is simply coasting to victory without hardly trying and that's no fun at all to watch.

    Also, I don't agree with the suggestion that equality for women means giving men unfair athletic advantages over women or that it means maximizing opportunities for the rape of women to occur. If that's what equality means by the common definition today then don't sign me up.

    Also also, you do an awful lot of broad brushing about what feminists in the abstract do and don't support. Just saying.
    Last edited by IMPress Polly; 11-19-2019 at 04:10 PM.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to IMPress Polly For This Useful Post:

    silvereyes (11-20-2019)

  3. #22
    Points: 27,391, Level: 40
    Level completed: 34%, Points required for next Level: 859
    Overall activity: 31.0%
    Achievements:
    25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    The Sage of Main Street's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    14734
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    11,228
    Points
    27,391
    Level
    40
    Thanks Given
    7,199
    Thanked 1,974x in 1,698 Posts
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    Of course she does but what she actually thinks is irrelevant. She'll say what she needs to say. It's just that she was caught off guard. She will soon have a rehearsed response that will "evolve" as it needs to.


    "Power to the People!" Smirked Marie Antoinette. Then She Laughed Her Head Off.




    Any female born with a silver spoon in her mouth will always speak with a forked tongue. Define Princess de Rodham as a rich girl instead of being distracted by the puppet show of Democrats, Liberals, and Feminists that the hereditary ruling class pulls the strings on.
    On the outside, trickling down on the Insiders
    The born-rich hate and fear all other White people.

  4. #23
    Points: 27,391, Level: 40
    Level completed: 34%, Points required for next Level: 859
    Overall activity: 31.0%
    Achievements:
    25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    The Sage of Main Street's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    14734
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    11,228
    Points
    27,391
    Level
    40
    Thanks Given
    7,199
    Thanked 1,974x in 1,698 Posts
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    That makes no sense at all. Hillary Clinton holds no public office and isn't running for one. In fact, that is my personal explanation for this development.
    Probably more free than even her daughter, whom who it has been speculated may run for public office at some point down the way.
    Sorry Sordid Sororities


    Chelsea is the sea in which her party's ship shall sink.
    On the outside, trickling down on the Insiders
    The born-rich hate and fear all other White people.

  5. #24
    Original Ranter
    Points: 228,404, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 46.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    397395
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    91,527
    Points
    228,404
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    18,188
    Thanked 34,338x in 24,344 Posts
    Mentioned
    924 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    I'm just going to say this once: the people who are currently anticipating another Hillary Clinton presidential campaign are all the same geniuses who also predicted that she wouldn't run for president in 2016 and that Mitt Romney would. Mark my words: she will not run. People, and especially people who plan to vote for Trump anyway, really just want this to be a more exciting nominating battle than it actually is because what's actually happening is just that the most boring and predictable candidate, Joe Biden, is simply coasting to victory without hardly trying and that's no fun at all.

    Also, I don't agree with the suggestion that equality for women means giving men unfair athletic advantages over women or that it means maximizing opportunities for the rape of women to occur. If that's what equality means by the common definition today then don't sign me up.

    Also also, you do an awful lot of broad brushing about what feminists in the abstract do and don't support. Just saying.
    Say it once, say it twice...shrug. I just said that I don't think she'll run either. Anyway, she's a career politician obviously looking to remain relevant. You shouldn't be surprised by any of this least of all that the Democrats are pandering to an assortment of deviants and weirdos. What did you think Hillary Clinton would suddenly stand tall on our own? Please.

    First of all, spare us the drama about rape. Thanks. As for the absurdity of transgender make believe...well, thanks for that. BTW, our very own tPF progressives were ridiculing this idea that transgenders were just itching to get into the ladies room so they could molest girls and women. Last I heard only rednecks and crazy evangelicals believed that sort of thing. I'm sure they'll be around soon to remind us. Not.

    The only broad brushing I do with regard to feminism generally is to point out that the term means essentially nothing. Virtually anyone could identify as a feminist.
    Last edited by Mister D; 11-19-2019 at 04:34 PM.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  6. #25
    Points: 70,304, Level: 64
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 646
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first Group50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    IMPress Polly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    153652
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vermont, USA
    Posts
    6,016
    Points
    70,304
    Level
    64
    Thanks Given
    6,253
    Thanked 5,073x in 2,984 Posts
    Mentioned
    541 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    Say it once, say it twice...shrug. I just said that I don't think she'll run either. Anyway, she's a career politician obviously looking to remain relevant. You shouldn't be surprised by any of this least of all that the Democrats are pandering to an assortment of deviants and weirdos. What did you think Hillary Clinton would suddenly stand tall on our own? Please.

    First of all, spare us the drama about rape. Thanks. As for the absurdity of transgender make believe...well, thanks for that. BTW, our very own tPF progressives were ridiculing this idea that transgenders were just itching to get into the ladies room so they could molest girls and women. Last I heard only rednecks and crazy evangelicals believed that sort of thing. I'm sure they'll be around soon to remind us. Not.

    The only broad brushing I do with regard to feminism generally is to point out that the term means essentially nothing. Virtually anyone could identify as a feminist.
    Your three-step process in deciding how to respond to a given post of mine:

    1) Decide in advance to disagree regardless of the content.
    2) Read the post.
    3) Explain why everything in it is wrong in the most needlessly aggressive and hostile fashion possible.

    Something like that, right? Be honest.

    Seeing as, as is typical of you, you are responding in less than good faith, I'll just respond to the one thing that I feel merits a reply, which is your second paragraph above: Why do you just assume I'm talking about restrooms specifically? I don't believe that trans-identified people are just natural born predators who are going around looking for women to rape. What I believe is that predatory men who consciously know they are men cynically take advantage of a lot of the policies that the transgender movement advocates for to find such opportunities.

    To illustrate what I mean, let's take prison housing policies as an example. I think that many men who commit violent crimes, especially which involve preying on girls and/or women in some fashion, suddenly decide that they're "trans-women" after they're convicted and in prison so that they can be re-housed in a women's prison for obvious reasons. Then a rape happens, shockingly by that same individual, and people are somehow caught off guard and surprised. The UK, for example, used to have a policy of re-housing male prisoners who decide they're women in women's prisons until recently when, following on a series of resultant rapes, the authorities began to instead house trans-identified inmates in separate prisons. There is, in my mind, simply no way it was a coincidence that 48% of the trans-identified inmates in the nation's prisons were there, in part, for committing sex crimes. Only 3% of actual female inmates in the UK had such convictions, and in fact only about 20% of the men had such convictions as well, so the fact that about half the trans-identified prisoners were sexual predators was a disproportionately high share for either sex. That makes no sense unless you remember that many of these trans identities were conveniently only 'discovered' by biologically male inmates after their convictions. Now it makes sense! Now we can see that there is a cynical motive at play behind these sudden discoveries of many men that they are female.

    Still think that groups like Fair Play for Women who pointed out this phenomenon had/have no legitimate concerns?
    Last edited by IMPress Polly; 11-20-2019 at 06:47 AM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to IMPress Polly For This Useful Post:

    silvereyes (11-20-2019)

  8. #26

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 16,524, Level: 31
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 926
    Overall activity: 38.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassYour first Group10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Admiral Ackbar's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    2214
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    3,057
    Points
    16,524
    Level
    31
    Thanks Given
    1,604
    Thanked 2,204x in 1,426 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    Your three-step process in deciding how to respond to a given post of mine:

    1) Decide in advance to disagree regardless of the content.
    2) Read the post.
    3) Explain why everything in it is wrong in the most needlessly aggressive and hostile fashion possible.

    Something like that, right? Be honest.

    Seeing as, as is typical of you, you are responding in less than good faith, I'll just respond to the one thing that I feel merits a reply, which is your second paragraph above: Why do you just assume I'm talking about restrooms specifically? I don't believe that trans-identified people are just natural born predators who are going around looking for women to rape. What I believe is that predatory men who consciously know they are men cynically take advantage of a lot of the policies that the transgender movement advocates for to find such opportunities.

    To illustrate what I mean, let's take prison housing policies as an example. I think that many men who commit violent crimes, especially which involve preying on girls and/or women in some fashion, suddenly decide that they're "trans-women" after they're convicted and in prison so that they can be re-housed in a women's prison for obvious reasons. Then a rape happens, shockingly by that same individual, and people are somehow caught off guard and surprised. The UK, for example, used to have a policy of re-housing male prisoners who decide they're women in women's prisons until recently when, following on a series of resultant rapes, the authorities began to instead house trans-identified inmates in separate prisons. There is, in my mind, simply no way it was a coincidence that 48% of the trans-identified inmates in the nation's prisons were there, in part, for committing sex crimes. Only 3% of actual female inmates in the UK had such convictions, and in fact only about 20% of the men had such convictions as well, so the fact that about half the trans-identified prisoners were sexual predators was a disproportionately high share for either sex. That makes no sense unless you remember that many of these trans identities were conveniently only 'discovered' by biologically male inmates after their convictions. Now it makes sense! Now we can see that there is a cynical motive at play behind these sudden discoveries of many men that they are female.

    Still think that groups like Fair Play for Women who pointed out this phenomenon had/have no legitimate concerns?
    I hate to say this but I think we agree. I think. I read what you are saying is that this whole Trans Indentification things is total nonsense and is being used in disengenious manner, by people to their advantage.

    This is what happens with pseudo science, new wave crap. A man is a man and woman is a woman. I have no medical degree, but I assure you I know how to tell the difference.
    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining"----Fletcher in The Outlaw Josey Wales

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Admiral Ackbar For This Useful Post:

    IMPress Polly (11-20-2019),silvereyes (11-20-2019)

  10. #27
    Original Ranter
    Points: 228,404, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 46.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    397395
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    91,527
    Points
    228,404
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    18,188
    Thanked 34,338x in 24,344 Posts
    Mentioned
    924 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    Your three-step process in deciding how to respond to a given post of mine:

    1) Decide in advance to disagree regardless of the content.
    2) Read the post.
    3) Explain why everything in it is wrong in the most needlessly aggressive and hostile fashion possible.

    Something like that, right? Be honest.

    Seeing as, as is typical of you, you are responding in less than good faith, I'll just respond to the one thing that I feel merits a reply, which is your second paragraph above: Why do you just assume I'm talking about restrooms specifically? I don't believe that trans-identified people are just natural born predators who are going around looking for women to rape. What I believe is that predatory men who consciously know they are men cynically take advantage of a lot of the policies that the transgender movement advocates for to find such opportunities.

    To illustrate what I mean, let's take prison housing policies as an example. I think that many men who commit violent crimes, especially which involve preying on girls and/or women in some fashion, suddenly decide that they're "trans-women" after they're convicted and in prison so that they can be re-housed in a women's prison for obvious reasons. Then a rape happens, shockingly by that same individual, and people are somehow caught off guard and surprised. The UK, for example, used to have a policy of re-housing male prisoners who decide they're women in women's prisons until recently when, following on a series of resultant rapes, the authorities began to instead house trans-identified inmates in separate prisons. There is, in my mind, simply no way it was a coincidence that 48% of the trans-identified inmates in the nation's prisons were there, in part, for committing sex crimes. Only 3% of actual female inmates in the UK had such convictions, and in fact only about 20% of the men had such convictions as well, so the fact that about half the trans-identified prisoners were sexual predators was a disproportionately high share for either sex. That makes no sense unless you remember that many of these trans identities were conveniently only 'discovered' by biologically male inmates after their convictions. Now it makes sense! Now we can see that there is a cynical motive at play behind these sudden discoveries of many men that they are female.

    Still think that groups like Fair Play for Women who pointed out this phenomenon had/have no legitimate concerns?
    We don't disagree that transgenderism is ridiculous. We disagree over the role feminist ideology has played in its appearance. Anyway, yes, I can be a $#@!. I get that but you aren't special. Y
    ou get treated like everyone else. Do you see me getting along with your male counterparts? I even savage conservatives when they annoy me. I argue with everyone!
    It's kind of ironic how upset that makes a supposedly radical feminist. I'm all about equal treatment, toots. FFS it's a message board!

    Unfortunately, I haven't assumed you were talking exclusively or specifically about bathrooms. That you took up an argument associated with conservative "bigots" reminded me that your fellow tPF progressives mocked the very notion that transgenders would prey on women and children be it in bathrooms or anywhere else. The idea that sexual predators would take advantage of policies accommodating transgenders was dismissed out of hand as "fear-mongering". Where are those defenders of the faith, anyway? They must not have seen your commentary. I'm sure if they had they would have told us how paranoid, hyperbolic and delusional this fear is. Not.

    Polly, it's a $#@!ing prison! ROFL You know they're filled with anti-social savages, right? Maybe that's not the best example? I don't believe that anywhere near a majority of transgenders are criminally-inclined and transitioned to have easier access to female victims. In any case, we agree. Biologically male inmates should not be housed with biologically female inmates at any time. That's just common sense. Even the guards should be all female. I'd like to say that it's incomprehensible to me how any administrator could allow such a thing to happen particularly if the "women" in question had been convicted of sexual crimes but...it's the U.K. They're way ahead over there. Separate housing for these weirdos is best because it's probably more likely that they'll be victims not victimizers.

    See, we can agree.
    Last edited by Mister D; 11-20-2019 at 08:34 PM.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  11. #28
    Points: 462,698, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 68.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    397477
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    150,081
    Points
    462,698
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    15,555
    Thanked 45,052x in 33,138 Posts
    Mentioned
    1723 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Admiral Ackbar View Post
    I hate to say this but I think we agree. I think. I read what you are saying is that this whole Trans Indentification things is total nonsense and is being used in disengenious manner, by people to their advantage.

    This is what happens with pseudo science, new wave crap. A man is a man and woman is a woman. I have no medical degree, but I assure you I know how to tell the difference.

    Right, but the whole transgender movement rides on the coattails of the radical feminism Polly professes, namely, that gender is a social construct.
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  12. #29
    Points: 70,304, Level: 64
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 646
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first Group50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    IMPress Polly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    153652
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vermont, USA
    Posts
    6,016
    Points
    70,304
    Level
    64
    Thanks Given
    6,253
    Thanked 5,073x in 2,984 Posts
    Mentioned
    541 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Right, but the whole transgender movement rides on the coattails of the radical feminism Polly professes, namely, that gender is a social construct.
    That's the exact opposite of correct. As the term itself suggests, transgenderism hinges on the idea that gender is a real thing. Ideologically, it literally defines womanhood and manhood themselves by stereotypical social roles, i.e. if you are "feminine", you are therefore a woman, etc. The premise is a fundamentally conservative one that plays on ideas you agree with. It is precisely because I reject the idea that men have to be "masculine" and women have to be "feminine" that I'm able to call this bull$#@!.

  13. #30
    Points: 10,107, Level: 24
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 743
    Overall activity: 50.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranCreated Album picturesSocial10000 Experience Points
    Rationalist's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1370
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,339
    Points
    10,107
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    1,776
    Thanked 1,360x in 943 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    That's the exact opposite of correct. As the term itself suggests, transgenderism hinges on the idea that gender is a real thing. Ideologically, it literally defines womanhood and manhood themselves by stereotypical social roles, i.e. if you are "feminine", you are therefore a woman, etc. The premise is a fundamentally conservative one that plays on ideas you agree with. It is precisely because I reject the idea that men have to be "masculine" and women have to be "feminine" that I'm able to call this bull$#@!.
    Yet it still begs the question.... Why don't all feminists reject transgenderism as a concept? Why is it that only certain radical feminists reject it, and the few who do are ostracized?

    It sounds to me that this has less to do with any traditional views on gender and more to do with political opportunism. The LGBT lobby apparently latches onto whatever societal anomaly of the month wants to have an identity movement.

    It's part of why many gay people have left the lobby -- like Douglas Murray. More and more people are waking up to the fact that the "movement" has been hijacked by lunatics and con artists -- in much the same way that the ACLU has become a political opportunist group, as has the NAACP.

    Unfortunately, this seems to be the nature of many leftist and progressive causes. They sometimes start out as a noble push for equality, but they end up becoming grievance addicts. What begins as advocacy for tolerance becomes demands for approval and conformity.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Single Sign On provided by vBSSO