Life of a Transexual Chess Player Pt. II: Competition
Sort:
Mmm - I don't think people are listening to one another here at all.
Yeah thanks Poo. And your point is?
Wolfbird - gay people are getting married here in the UK. I don't know exactly what Momeets angle is here, he can explain himself. However, it does not sound homophobic to me. He is talking about other issues.
I see his angle as being entirely different the way that I read it. But that is me.
I read it as being appalled that children are being indocrinated into issues which they are far too young to understand & at a delicate, impressionable age.
But perhaps I have it wrong. He is also suggesting ulterior motives for this type of education. But again -perhaps I am wrong; but he mentions Marxist indocrination. Which is suggestive of ulterior motives behind some of these things.
But that is the way I read it.
You two seem to be a country mile apart here.
I guess Mo can clarify what he is trying to say.
Apr 26, 2016
0
#207
I've decided not to discuss it.
We have uni-sex bathrooms here. One person at time.
ok Wolfbird no worries
Apr 26, 2016
0
#209
MoMeetsAisha wrote:
DrSpudnik wrote:
tl;dr
For you, clearly. Like anyone cares less what you read, or what you don't. Your last five replies on this thread have been one-sentence barbs, so I guess 'short and sweet' is how you like to play it. Good for you!
Brevity is the soul of wit. By that standard, you're retarded.
Wolfbird wrote:
I've decided not to discuss it.
We have uni-sex bathrooms here. One person at time.
That's fine that you want out of the discussion.
It's a shame you felt the need to delete all your posts; they should have remained unless you were of course embarrassed by your own words.
When a commenter decides to delete a dozen posts, the entire thread loses it's cohesiveness and the general train of the conversation. It's only partially possible to understand it, because I still have quoted parts of your posts. That's disrespectful to all who have invested time reading it, and myself who spent a lot of effort and patience to answer you, despite your abrasiveness.
You were verbally abusive, attributing words, thoughts and actions to me which were completely false, labelled me with numerous slurs, and even said people like me should never be around children. Not once did you walk back any of that, apologise, or try to be conciliatory. No. You just deleted it all and walked away.
I assume that you realised how you were presenting yourself, and this was part (if not all) of the reason why you deleted all your posts.
Shame.
DrSpudnik wrote:
Brevity is the soul of wit. By that standard, you're retarded.
Ah I see. You are here to present your 'wit' to others, not to have a conversation. Wit, to you, is "tl;dr" and short sentence slurs.
I must have completely misundertood the purpose of a 'forum'. I had misunderstood it to be about conversation on a topic. My bad.
I assume calling complete strangers "retarded" is your idea of wit.
Nikprit wrote:
Wolfbird - gay people are getting married here in the UK. I don't know exactly what Momeets angle is here, he can explain himself. However, it does not sound homophobic to me. He is talking about other issues.
I see his angle as being entirely different the way that I read it. But that is me.
I read it as being appalled that children are being indocrinated into issues which they are far too young to understand & at a delicate, impressionable age.
But perhaps I have it wrong. He is also suggesting ulterior motives for this type of education. But again -perhaps I am wrong; but he mentions Marxist indocrination. Which is suggestive of ulterior motives behind some of these things.
But that is the way I read it.
You two seem to be a country mile apart here.
I guess Mo can clarify what he is trying to say.
Nikprit, you have summarised it perfectly.
That's because you have reading comprehension skills, and are open to listen to other peoples perspectives and actually trying to understand them. You are trying to be civil, not point-score / slander people to massage your own ego.
So, thanks for being normal! I was beginning to wonder whether I had strayed onto a Buzzfeed comment section instead of Chess.com.
Apr 27, 2016
0
#213
MoMeetsAisha wrote:
Wolfbird wrote:
I've decided not to discuss it.
We have uni-sex bathrooms here. One person at time.
That's fine that you want out of the discussion.
It's a shame you felt the need to delete all your posts; they should have remained unless you were of course embarrassed by your own words.
When a commenter decides to delete a dozen posts, the entire thread loses it's cohesiveness and the general train of the conversation. It's only partially possible to understand it, because I still have quoted parts of your posts. That's disrespectful to all who have invested time reading it, and myself who spent a lot of effort and patience to answer you, despite your abrasiveness.
You were verbally abusive, attributing words, thoughts and actions to me which were completely false, labelled me with numerous slurs, and even said people like me should never be around children. Not once did you walk back any of that, apologise, or try to be conciliatory. No. You just deleted it all and walked away.
I assume that you realised how you were presenting yourself, and this was part (if not all) of the reason why you deleted all your posts.
Shame.
Actually, it was me who said you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near children - an overstatement perhaps, I'll retract it.
I still think your narrative is ill-informed and unhelpful though, and nothing you have posted on this forum has caused me to reconsider that claim.
"Actually, it was me who said you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near children - an overstatement perhaps, I'll retract it."
My mistake, thanks for retracting.
"I still think your narrative is ill-informed and unhelpful though, and nothing you have posted on this forum has caused me to reconsider that claim."
Fine, happy to agree to disagree. Society is healthier with a range of opinions. The only diversity the Left does not seem to welcome with open arms, is diversity of the intellectual kind.
The difficuty I have is that if an opinion differs from the mainstream Leftist-dominated narrative, it is immediately shut down using labelling, pigeon-holing, ridicue and slander to marginalise, rather than discussion in the spirit of openness and even-handedness.
As for my narrative, yes you stated as much with your post about peer-reviewed studies etc. I replied to that, but you have not responded...
'ill-informed' - no, I disagree with you. Ill-informed implies I lack knowledge. I do not. I have read extensively on it; this is my field. I am a trained counsellor and social worker. Has it crossed your mind that I am not 'ill-informed', I am aware of the mainstream Leftist narrative, I just do not agree with much of it. As a social worker, I have been on numerous course, and as part of my CPD (continuous professional development) requirements, I have had to 'keep up' with the new pseudo-science around gender studies. All of us in the profession have noted the push of this new agenda; believe ME when I tell you that the majority of people in the field are concerned about the way things are going. PC keeps people silent and compliant; people go along and make the right noises so as not to be seen as transphobic or bigoted. But one-to-one and in the homes, people are concerned about a doctrine pushed solely on ideological and subjective opinions.
Disagreement is not tantamount to being ill-informed; that's yet another slur against me.
'Unhelpful' is another word I disagree with. What are the pros and cons of this agenda? How did we all seem to survive without this agenda being pushed? Why this - and not the many far more important issues? Why did it come out of nowhere to saturate the media and pop culture? I suggest you think I am 'unhelpful' in that I am presenting a narrative that you disagree with. If that is wrong, please explain what you mean. Who SHOULD I be helpful to, and for what purpose?
Ghostliner, humour me and read this piece by Stella Morabito:
http://thefederalist.com/2014/06/23/how-the-trans-agenda-seeks-to-redefine-everyone/
Yes judging by your past posts, you will have an instinctive aversion to it because it is not 'peer-reviewed' or come from for of Establishment or perceived academic authority.
Stella Morabito is a former CIA analyst who is a well known commentator on Political Correctness. Her field was studying Soviet propaganda, mass manipulation, censorship and the development of what we now come to understand as PC. She is also a former Leftist from a very Leftist family - her interviews about her 'past life' and her change of course (politically) are very interesting.
Some of the most incisive and robust commentators on PC are former radical Leftists, who now dedicate their life to writing about it.
So you will be inclined - as many on the Left do - to not entertain an alternative viewpoint, and instead dismiss this article out of hand.
However a real intellectual applies the Socratic method and reads with an open mind, ESPECIALLY counter-opinions, and let the material raise questions and answers in your own mind. Not Occams razor - dismissing it because it is seemingly not the simplistic answer. Socratic, two sided, open-minded.
But humour me. Please read the article and let me know what you think about it.
Apr 27, 2016
0
#216
MoMeetsAisha wrote:
DrSpudnik wrote:
Brevity is the soul of wit. By that standard, you're retarded.
Ah I see. You are here to present your 'wit' to others, not to have a conversation. Wit, to you, is "tl;dr" and short sentence slurs.
I must have completely misundertood the purpose of a 'forum'. I had misunderstood it to be about conversation on a topic. My bad.
I assume calling complete strangers "retarded" is your idea of wit.
There is no comversation here, only a monologue by a gasbag who types page-long screeds on brain dead crap and expects everyone to waste their lives reading and reacting to it.
Or if you don't want to hear an ex-Leftist perspective on it, what about a transgendered man who had the operation, and later lived to regret it.
Walt Heyer has been interviewed on numerous shows, he runs an advocacy site to help transgendered people with regrets to deal with their issues. He points out that if it is such a beautiful, wonerful thing to be encouraged even from childhood, even by teachers without consent of parents - why is there an insanely high rate of suicide, higher still among post-op transgendered? he lists 41% attempted suicide rate, but the video features a lot of statistics.
You can dismiss ME as a right wing conspiracy theorist, ill-informed, danger to children, prejudiceed, sock puppet, troll, (sorry, did I miss an insult?). Its not so easy sitting behind your screen and dismissing a transgendered man with regrets, who has helped HUNDREDS of people.
He has a degree in psychology, in case you want to dismiss him as well for not meeting your Establishment / "peer-review" / letters-after-the-name bias (AKA the 'appeal to authority' logical fallacy).
The narrative HE states is strikingly similar to mine, to Stella Morabito, to MANY on the LEFT who have deep concerns and misgivings with how fast and hard this agenda is percolating into modern society.
He even states he felt he was used for an agenda and while mentally / emotionally in a bad place, was pushed into having therapies and operations which he now DEEPLY regrets. A pawn of others who have an agenda to push.
Is HE a hater? is he 'ill-informed'? is he 'unhelpful'? if NOT - please explain why not - yet you state that I am?
And this is him, and adult of 41. Look at children undergoing hormone-suppressing therapies, operations. Parents told and persuaded their kids have 'gender dysphoria' because their boy might behave effeminately or like dressing up in girls clothes as part of their immature experimentations.
But hey - listen to this transphobic unhelpful ill-informed man and see what you think...
https://youtu.be/coZk2kyByHE - interview
http://www.sexchangeregret.com/ - Walt Heyer's website
DrSpudnik wrote:
There is no comversation here, only a monologue by a gasbag who types page-long screeds on brain dead crap and expects everyone to waste their lives reading and reacting to it.
There was a conversation but *someone* decided to delete all their posts...
I have no expectations of you 
why the f would I? If you don't like it, don't read it. Simples.
It strikes me as brain-dead that you continue to comment and read something when you are clearly not interested... LOL
Its like someone standing in the rain without an umbrella complaining about getting wet. If you don't like it, get an umbrella or go indoors.
Apr 27, 2016
0
#219
MoMeetsAisha wrote:
Ghostliner, humour me and read this piece by Stella Morabito:
http://thefederalist.com/2014/06/23/how-the-trans-agenda-seeks-to-redefine-everyone/
Yes judging by your past posts, you will have an instinctive aversion to it because it is not 'peer-reviewed' or come from for of Establishment or perceived academic authority.
Stella Morabito is a former CIA analyst who is a well known commentator on Political Correctness. Her field was studying Soviet propaganda, mass manipulation, censorship and the development of what we now come to understand as PC. She is also a former Leftist from a very Leftist family - her interviews about her 'past life' and her change of course (politically) are very interesting.
Some of the most incisive and robust commentators on PC are former radical Leftists, who now dedicate their life to writing about it.
So you will be inclined - as many on the Left do - to not entertain an alternative viewpoint, and instead dismiss this article out of hand.
I started reading this article (with a heavy heart, admittedly) but stopped abruptly here:
"But for some reason, even though Thomas was legally documented as male, she (oops!)..."
I shut it down at the (oops!) comment. These are serious issues which have a huge impact on peoples' lives and wellbeing, the very least I expect from a commentator is that they should avoid sniggering like some kid in the playground.
I don't understand your referencing anyway. I'm sure her career trajectory must be fascinating for you but how is this relevant? Why would I go to a former CIA wonk for a briefing on transgender issues? It doesn't make a scrap of sense.
Please try to understand - peer-review might be a secondary consideration for you but it isn't for me, and the article you cited just there ilustrates why, beautifully. You've openly admitted yourself that you have deliberately exaggerated and sensationalised your own narrative right here on this thread, hasn't it occurred to you that other commentators might do likewise? Newspapers, magazines, bloggers - they all have a long-established notoriety and track record for distortion, selective reportage, wild exaggeration, scaremongering, even outright fabrication. Didn't you know this?
This material is not reliable, please stop waving it under my nose - unless it's from a serious, established source I won't read it and nor should anyone else.
However a real intellectual applies the Socratic method and reads with an open mind, ESPECIALLY counter-opinions, and let the material raise questions and answers in your own mind. Not Occams razor - dismissing it because it is seemingly not the simplistic answer. Socratic, two sided, open-minded.
You are confused, real intellectuals don't get their facts from The Beano. And Occam's Razor is a principle, a rule-of-thumb if you like, and a useful one too. Applying this principle here doesn't mean your narrative has been 'dismissed' necessarily, it merely implies that the other one is probably the correct one. You *might* want to compare the two propositions again?
Keeping an open mind is important sure, but not to the point that our brains flop out onto our shoulders; we need to do enough to ensure that they stay in place as well, right? I would suggest that a good start might be to disregard the blogs and stick to established literature instead.
But humour me. Please read the article and let me know what you think about it.
I started reading this article (with a heavy heart, admittedly)
Get over yourself man. Its a major website with a large readership and well respected. It might be right wing' but don't have a heavy heart reading alternative views. I read the Guardian all the time, but I don't have a heavy heart doing it.
LOL
I shut it down at the (oops!) comment.
I asked you to read just one thing, as a courtesy, and you couldn't even do that. You see the word 'oops' and this instantly gives you an excuse to jump on the self-righteous, victimhood, "look-how-insensitive" bandwagon. Geez grow a set will you.
The "Oops" was in the context of a completely confusing, exasperating story... if you hadn't just switched off 10% of the way in (in your arrogance and narrow-mindedness) - you would have got to the point. Here let me help you out: (quote from link)
Well, maybe Exhibit A should be Oprah Winfrey introducing us to “the first pregnant man” in 2008. This would be a woman named Tracey who “transitioned” to being Thomas by having a double mastectomy with a dose of hormones to produce facial hair and such. Thomas thought it would be nice to have a baby someday, and so decided to keep “his” vagina, uterus, and ovaries intact. But for some reason, even though Thomas was legally documented as male, she (oops!) needed a sperm donation. (Life isn’t fair.) In any event, when pregnant, Thomas was happy to pose nude (mostly, anyway) for the camera.
Thomas has since had two more children and in 2012 decided to undergo surgery for a more complete transition to a male bodily appearance. She now lectures on “trans fertility and reproductive rights.” Most do not understand what a seismic shift in language is being pushed here. In this scheme of things, using the pronoun “she” to refer to a person who goes through pregnancy and gives birth to a child is grounds for punishment.
You lecture me about thinking, yet you stop reading because your pwoor wittle fweelings are hurt by ONE LITTLE WORD! if you had spent another 30 seconds reading the rest, you would have understood the context. But no... run from the hills from opinions which differ from your own delicate mainstream SJW sensibilities. You display all the classic traits of a sensitive Leftist PC snowflake.
So in in this context it is completely 'fair game' to be (a) confused at the incredibly complexities now unravelling, (b) exasperated at how we are being expected to take all this in without critique, and (c) concerned about the new tyranny of PC language which we all have to learn about, conform to and implement for fear of being labelled a transphobe / bigot.
Get it? That's the point she is making.
I would suggest that a good start might be to disregard the blogs and stick to established literature instead.
Get of your high horse. The vast majority of links I gave were news sources of verifiable events. Why the f would I need to read your 'established literature' (which you neither cite nor refer me to) - to understand commons sense and news items?
All my other posts where I have asked you question you have conveniently ignored. Instead you keep typing the same defensive "you are uninformed" response, with nothing to back it up.
I'm done with this conversation. I put a lot of effort in putting together responses to you, but you haven't even given me the basic courtesy of replying to past questions or reading just one article.
It is impossible to have a discussion when you dismiss over 20 separate sources, in your 'appeal to authority' style arument that none of it has any merit.
So I will leave it there with you.
WOLFBIRD
"I thought since you are posting links I would too. And who is trolling who??"
No. *sighs*. You posted a bunch of irrelevant statistics, not a link. You making the point how widespread paedophilia and various sex crimes is - is actually backing up everything I have said to this point. The fact that you are unable to grasp this, is your problem.
I can lead a horse to water...
"How many children do you have that you're so worried they're going to be gay or start dressing in clothes you don't approve of?"
You are just not reading anything are you? For what its worth, i am not worried about them dressing in clothes of the opposite gender. I never mentioned anything about them being 'gay' or my fear of such. On THAT issue, I am fine if that's who they are. I won;t go out of my way to encourage it, and I will try to avoid them being exposed to sexualised conversations / pop culture as much as possible - but if me son was gay or my daughter lesbian, i would respect that and treat them the same. With love as a father.
Don't pretened to know me from behind your keyboard, or presume to put words in my mouth, you KNOW i haven't said.
I am worried about 20-something year old teachers, fresh out of Marxist indoctrination SJW centres (sorry, what poses as 'universities' today), asking my kids about their identity and sexual orientation, making them watch cartoons explaining these issues, and confusing them.
I am worried about sex offenders taking advantage of ludicrous trans-friendly laws, to be in a positon where they could take advantage of them.
I am worried about my wife, who has stopped going to the gym, because men are changing in the womens locker rooms - and when she complained, she was treated like SHE was in the wrong.
I object to my daughter being at school, and seeing boys change or shower, because of laws which are already introduced elsewhere and I don't want them introduced in my kids primary school.
I am worried about deeper issues which the Left wing media never discuss, in their desire to be tolerant of EVERYTHING. Like, what if there is another agenda? what are the longterm effects of such drastic social changes, introduced in only a few short years? but hey, i am a kook and a hater for considering such things.
Read this and ponder. Though i doubt you will. It's clear you have never looked at any of my links, nor read my posts properly.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/06/23/how-the-trans-agenda-seeks-to-redefine-everyone/