As children with GID only rarely go on to have permanent transsexualism, irreversible physical interventions are clearly not indicated until after the individual’s psychosexual development is complete. The identity-creating experiences of this phase of development should not be restricted by the use of LHRH analogues that prevent puberty.
At the assessment in childhood, 60% of the girls met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria for GID, and 40% were subthreshold for the diagnosis. At follow-up, 3 participants (12%) were judged to have GID or gender dysphoria.
In case you haven't noticed, the number of in-home video game consoles totally swamps the number of video game arcade machines. Stop living in the past. Your mode of thinking is obsolete, same as you.
In case you haven't noticed, this doesn't contradict anything I've stated.
As for high blood pressure, take some estrogen.
That would cause a ton of other problems, so no thanks. My blood pressure is actually quite well controlled with exercise and prescription sleep medication, in addition to 6 grams daily of taurine supplement.
As for high blood pressure, take some estrogen. Contrary to previous findings, it's now known to be beneficial to both the circulatory system and the brain, by making the blood vessels more flexible and reducing the risk of stroke. It's also a powerful antidepressant. Oh wait - you can't/won't do that. I can (and do) which means I'm likely to live far longer than you. Sux 2 B U.
CONCLUSIONS: The increased mortality in hormone-treated MtF transsexuals was mainly due to non-hormone-related causes, but ethinyl estradiol may increase the risk of cardiovascular death. In the FtM transsexuals, use of testosterone in doses used for hypogonadal men seemed safe.
(Or if it was you stating this to me, you'd refer to it as a lie.)
And the reason the life expectancy is higher for real women is widely recognized as being owed to social factors (for example, men having a tendency of taking on jobs that are more hazardous to their health.) This is reinforced by the fact that the extra longevity that women have varies a lot from country to country, even among first world countries.
The simple fact is that post-2000 suicide rates are very low because society has changed. [huffingtonpost.com] And your stats are full of shit - they were from an earlier time, where transwomen faced far more assholes like you than today.
As for widespread regret? It's a lie.... and...
Maybe we should ban plastic surgery to everyone except transsexuals, since clearly they're the group where the majority don't have regrets, just a tiny minority. And as the article points out, even that rate is falling with more advances in technique.
Your article doesn't do anything to refute what I stated; in fact it does the opposite and even contradicts what you stated here: It cites a source which analyzes the ARIF study, and that source agrees with ARIF that there is no scientific evidence that meets the gold standard of proving that sex change is clinically effective. Furthermore, that source also cites a 2014 study saying that suicide rates among transpeople is even higher than what I stated. So thank you for the link.
And you lied here:
It has nothing to do with testosterone
And you base this on...absolutely nothing.
and everything to do with men's visceral negative reaction to male-to-female sex changes. We don't see anywhere near the levels of hate and negativity directed towards F2M transsexuals - even those F2M who aren't on hormones. Transmisogeny is real, and you're a prime example.
No, it's just you.
That aside, I don't think you are capable of understanding the difference between lying, mis-stating, misunderstanding, mis-remembering, and being misinformed. So far everything you've said that I lied about is either something that wasn't incorrect at all, or was one of the later, and was not in any way an intentionally false statement. This is unlike the link I keep posting where I plainly show that you've made many intentionally false statements.
Also, as for your claiming that I'm a narcissist, my psychiatrist and psychologist disagree. And of course they're in a better position to make a valid judgement, given that they've actually examined, interviewed, and tested me. So once again, you're full of shit.
It's not surprising because narcissistic personality disorder is well known to be difficult to diagnose, and even more difficult to treat. Very rarely will a narcissist even mention that they may have the problem to begin with, and when diagnosed, they'll usually insist that there's no problem at all. Most of them are able to function well regardless, so it just doesn't even come up:
So they either didn't evaluate you for this, or just plain missed it. This happens all the time, even with personality disorders that are easier to diagnose. I saw many psychiatrists before one told me that I had avoidant personality disorder. In all of those years prior, none of them even mentioned it once. They also may want to provide a supportive environment, and telling you that you are a narcissist doesn't help at all, so they'd prefer to not bring it up.
So even if your shrinks didn't mention it, that doesn't prove anything. In fact, it's rather perplexing to me that you can't even see it yourself, but again, that is also a common trait of narcissism and is therefore expected. Notice how you're reaching really really hard (and missing even harder) to try to prove that I'm lying...That's a behavior I would expect from somebody who is trying very hard to prove that they are superior or at least have some kind of moral high ground.
We've been over this before. You lie, repeatedly, and badly.
This is just you projecting. I have provided very good evidence of your fibs. Do you want me to link it again? Remember that you haven't even disputed any of it or even tried to offer an explanation.
Your infatuation with me and need to initiate the insults in an attempt to somehow "prove" that I should be unhappy with my decision makes you one sick fuck.
I haven't made any attempts at that.
And you really should stop with your accusations of narcissism.
It's not an accusation. That would be like saying I'm accusing you of being a transexual.
Looks like you have something in common with them. Though honestly, I think it's just you who isn't grounded in reality, and so everybody else looks wrong to you. More on this below.
And I'm sure there are women who are just as bad. Addicted to Facebook or Twitter or Candy Crush or whatever. It really pisses me off when I visit other women for a get together and they ALL have their faces buried in their phones or tablets (and so do their kids).
That isn't my experience at all. At social affairs I go to, women are rarely engaged in their smartphones -- sure, they might pull it out once in a while, but they're usually talking to people around them. But if they're ALL doing it, then this is most likely a form of nonverbal communication: They're doing what they can to avoid making eye contact with somebody so that this person can't easily start a conversation, and they're sending a nonverbal message of "I don't want you to talk to me" to that person. This is something everybody does when they're around somebody that they don't want anything to do with, but at the same time they don't want any confrontation, and it's been happening since time immemorial. Before smartphones it was done with other things like books, newspapers, weaving baskets, solving puzzles, making art, and many other one-person activities that can be done around other people. Men and women alike do this.
In your case, I think it's pretty obvious who they're trying to avoid, and your quietly leaving is exactly what they wanted to happen. At social events, very few people bury their heads in their smartphones. The ones that really want to do this won't even come to begin with. The fact that you often see otherwise says more about you, not them.
By the way, I have many geeky coworkers, and not a single one of them is socially isolated, with all but two of them having kids (I am one of the two that don't.) And again, this is probably your experience because what they're really doing is trying to isolate themselves from you, so naturally you think you see many socially isolated people. And I'm sure you'll disagree, as narcissists often do in situations like these. Narcissists tend to think that all people inherently like them, unless they make obvious statements otherwise, and that everybody who doesn't like them is just a bad person. And of course, narcissists handle it very poorly when somebody doesn't like them. This is also why you get so upset when you see people buried in their smartphones instead of paying attention to you. (Don't deny this; you said, and I quote "it really pisses me off".)
Personally, on the rare occasion I see other people buried in their phones, it does not bother me at all.
Where the hell did I ever advocate for eugenics (even for you, because it's not necessary: you're never going to breed anyway)? Pointing out a problem situation isn't advocating in favour of it.
That's a line of BS, and you know it. You've for a very long time been talking down to people who you refer to as nerds simply because they don't agree with you, and you've mentioned with your own satisfaction that they'll be eliminated from the gene pool. By the way, my "nerdiness" has landed me another girlfriend; so much for your stupid theory. And quit fucking pretending that you speak for women -- you're not a woman, and you don't speak for them. They can speak for themselves quite well without your help.
I will, however, cop to favouring some forms of censorship. We have laws here against hate speech, and I think that's a good thing. And in case you haven't noticed, both Facebook and Google now censor certain types of posts (Facebook) and videos (youtube).
They only do it because it gets them advertising dollars, because advertisers don't like getting associated with anything controversial. Google did basically nothing about it until the wall street journal (right leaning, by the way) wrote an article about it, and the advertisers subsequently started pulling their ads; something they wouldn't have done if nobody had said anything.
The wall street journal likely did this because they they've been watching their own revenues drop with the rise of social media, basically as if to say that only media-industry published content is safe.
Furthermore, I'm not going to make my life's decisions on whatever facebook and google decide. If I did, then they would already have a complete dossier on everything there is to know about me, which they don't because I don't participate.
And as for militancy, I have engaged in both peaceful protest and legal action - for what I believe in. That's both my right and my responsibility in a democracy. As for "being militant" against you, I'm just giving you back some of what you've served me.
Nope, you specifically said, and I quote "I'll have the cops on your ass in minutes" (something that wouldn't happen, by the way, yet another one of your fucked up lies about Canadian law.) Furthermore, I have in no way been militant against you: I've never made any kind of threat against you, I've never suggested that you be arrested, and I've never suggested that there should be any government action against you. All of these would be militant behavior, and you've done all three to me.
Why? Because you have a problem with transsexuals. You don't believe that we can possibly be happier as women than we were as men, probably because you believe that men are innately superior to women.
No, I didn't say that it wasn't possible, I'm sure in a few rare cases it is, as I've mentioned before. However, as I've stated, I think the medical community is making a very grave a mistake by advocating this, and I strongly believe that this will (unfortunately) end up being another black eye on psychiatry, of which they already have too many, which is sad because it only sows distrust against the psychiatry field, which has done a lot of good for a lot of people.
The suicide rate among transexuals before, during, and after transition is 41%, even if they have nothing but full support from their friends and family and are happily employed. And in fact, University of Birmingham's ARIF, which is a very well respected group in the scientific community, has plainly stated that there's no robust scientific evidence that sex change therapy is clinically effective.
Now, as a Libertarian, I fully support your right to getting mutilated to your heart's content (at your own expense), but if you think you're going to convince anyone that you're happier because you did so, well, you're delusional.
Agreed. And my opinions on this matter have been entirely from the perspective of critiquing the medical community. The US mostly has this right, (the process is far more stringent here) but other countries (including Canada, where Barbara is from) do the highly irresponsible thing of giving sex changes to children while doing relatively very little in the way of due diligence. The research has been very strong in that 70-80% of kids who express feelings of gender dysphoria just naturally grow out of it if there's no affirmation, and furthermore expressing no desire for it at all when they grow older and can make their own medical decisions.
There are plenty of guys whose life outside of work centers around video games. It's not limited to any one type of job.
If you weren't retarded, you could see that video games are one of the most social activities that exist. The first hardcore gamers pretty much exclusively played in arcades at bars with friends, and such an environment still exists today. Ever been to Dave and Busters? Of course you haven't, because nazi like yourself wouldn't ever be accepted there. Another common activity is LAN parties and tabletop RPGs (albeit the later isn't a video game.)
The closest you'd ever be to a bar with an arcade is the street corner offering services at 5 bucks a lay.
I personally love video games, and if there were more hours in a day, I'd probably be playing them. However, most of my evening is taken by 2 hours at the gym 5 days a week in addition to the extra sleep I require (both of these are used to control my hypertension, which is secondary to my iga nephropathy. I'm on the maximum dose of FIVE classes of anti-hypertensive drugs, and it's just not enough.)
Allow me to introduce you to Tom (Barbara) Hudson. He's a narcissist who jumped on the alt-left bandwagon, and because he hated white males, he paid to have his genitals removed. He hates me quite a bit just because I'm a white male (in spite of my making gestures of goodwill) and ever since then I've called him out on his BS lies.
He also shares much in common with nazis as he advocates a complete ban of anonymous speech (a la China) in addition to speech codes, and advocates penalties up to and including violence against those he disagrees with, plus eugenics, plus he's quite a bigot.
If ever there was an example of an alt-left...this is it, plain as day.
We're conducting a vast experiment in eugenics - will those "bros" who fail to breed in sufficient numbers eventually drop out of the gene pool, leaving the human race more resistant to becoming compulsively focused on a very limited set of activities, or is it like gambling and other addictions, where there will always be a sucker born every minute?
I think that pretty well tops off what I've been saying all along...
Militant against those who merely disagree? Check. Lies in order to spread his message? Check. Favors censorship? Check. Advocates eugenics? Check.
You are, in fact, a Nazi...albeit the alt-left version.
This is especially relevant in the current climate of having politicians and the media deciding who is a nazi and who isn't based on a whim. Or worse, groups like Antifa and universities like Evergreen State essentially being able to justify violence and censorship against anybody that they decide is a nazi, with the police and university staff only providing protection to the side making those accusations. Take for example, the Coulter and Milo speeches at Berkeley.
I'm not sure what you mean by "historical myth", however there are a few other things I want to add to this:
- Lincoln was an unabashed racist who believed in white supremacy - Others have said "does Germany have memorials of Nazi era people" and the answer is:
Animal rights activists do argue for better living conditions for farm animals.
Depends on which ones. Most vegans I've heard from want the practice banned entirely. PETA feels the same way, including banning any captivity of animals period, including pets and service animals.
I don't think that list is comprehensive, rather there is an explicit allowed and explicit disallowed with definitions for each, but none of that excludes these from being used. And these particular pesticides have no alternative for certain organic crops that would be allowed under the current rules in both the US and the EU, as stated by the organic lobby itself to the EU:
That doesn't actually apply to anybody, nor did it when the first person said it (who had no government guaranteed freedom of speech.) The idea is that in a well functioning democracy, everybody support's everybody else's right to free speech.
The perspective I'm looking at it from is that if you look at gender spread across different jobs, it's kind of obvious that men and women gravitate towards different types of work:
The #2 and #3 on that list alone pay pretty damn well, and as you can see they are overwhelmingly dominated by females. When males take the #1 job on that list, they typically get looked upon with distrust and that they don't belong simply for the fact that they're a male, but even so, I don't think that would at all be a reason that few men want that particular job, namely, most men I know have little tolerance for crying toddlers, and thus most would not like that job other than maybe a simple "it pays the bills," which is typically a reason why somebody might do substandard work.
That all said, I'm not sure the reasoning why we need to say that we must have 50% women in tech, and that anything else is one of "discrimination", "society's fault", or "men make the environment uncomfortable and/or hostile".
At least one female poster on slashdot pretty well hinted that she doesn't necessarily like the work, rather "it pays the bills":
We're there to work, to make money, and to go home. That's all there is to it.
While there's nothing wrong with this attitude, in my experience, people with this attitude tend to be underperformers, which if that is true in your case, then it may further reinforce the stereotype at hand. I personally like the work that I do; and on occasion I'm known to stay an hour late at work because I was solving a problem that I found to be interesting.
Then by your definition, the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, the Adams National Historical Park, and a big long list of others are also revisionist history. All of these were built and/or dedicated in years ranging from at least 50 to over 100 after the death of the person they commemorate.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll just leave a few references here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
As children with GID only rarely go on to have permanent transsexualism, irreversible physical interventions are clearly not indicated until after the individual’s psychosexual development is complete. The identity-creating experiences of this phase of development should not be restricted by the use of LHRH analogues that prevent puberty.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
At the assessment in childhood, 60% of the girls met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria for GID, and 40% were subthreshold for the diagnosis. At follow-up, 3 participants (12%) were judged to have GID or gender dysphoria.
In case you haven't noticed, the number of in-home video game consoles totally swamps the number of video game arcade machines. Stop living in the past. Your mode of thinking is obsolete, same as you.
In case you haven't noticed, this doesn't contradict anything I've stated.
As for high blood pressure, take some estrogen.
That would cause a ton of other problems, so no thanks. My blood pressure is actually quite well controlled with exercise and prescription sleep medication, in addition to 6 grams daily of taurine supplement.
As for high blood pressure, take some estrogen. Contrary to previous findings, it's now known to be beneficial to both the circulatory system and the brain, by making the blood vessels more flexible and reducing the risk of stroke. It's also a powerful antidepressant. Oh wait - you can't/won't do that. I can (and do) which means I'm likely to live far longer than you. Sux 2 B U.
You're sadly mistaken:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
CONCLUSIONS: The increased mortality in hormone-treated MtF transsexuals was mainly due to non-hormone-related causes, but ethinyl estradiol may increase the risk of cardiovascular death. In the FtM transsexuals, use of testosterone in doses used for hypogonadal men seemed safe.
(Or if it was you stating this to me, you'd refer to it as a lie.)
And the reason the life expectancy is higher for real women is widely recognized as being owed to social factors (for example, men having a tendency of taking on jobs that are more hazardous to their health.) This is reinforced by the fact that the extra longevity that women have varies a lot from country to country, even among first world countries.
Again, where have I ever advocated for eugenics?
The simple fact is that post-2000 suicide rates are very low because society has changed. [huffingtonpost.com] And your stats are full of shit - they were from an earlier time, where transwomen faced far more assholes like you than today.
As for widespread regret? It's a lie. ... and ...
Maybe we should ban plastic surgery to everyone except transsexuals, since clearly they're the group where the majority don't have regrets, just a tiny minority. And as the article points out, even that rate is falling with more advances in technique.
Your article doesn't do anything to refute what I stated; in fact it does the opposite and even contradicts what you stated here: It cites a source which analyzes the ARIF study, and that source agrees with ARIF that there is no scientific evidence that meets the gold standard of proving that sex change is clinically effective. Furthermore, that source also cites a 2014 study saying that suicide rates among transpeople is even higher than what I stated. So thank you for the link.
And you lied here:
It has nothing to do with testosterone
And you base this on...absolutely nothing.
and everything to do with men's visceral negative reaction to male-to-female sex changes. We don't see anywhere near the levels of hate and negativity directed towards F2M transsexuals - even those F2M who aren't on hormones. Transmisogeny is real, and you're a prime example.
No, it's just you.
That aside, I don't think you are capable of understanding the difference between lying, mis-stating, misunderstanding, mis-remembering, and being misinformed. So far everything you've said that I lied about is either something that wasn't incorrect at all, or was one of the later, and was not in any way an intentionally false statement. This is unlike the link I keep posting where I plainly show that you've made many intentionally false statements.
Also, as for your claiming that I'm a narcissist, my psychiatrist and psychologist disagree. And of course they're in a better position to make a valid judgement, given that they've actually examined, interviewed, and tested me. So once again, you're full of shit.
It's not surprising because narcissistic personality disorder is well known to be difficult to diagnose, and even more difficult to treat. Very rarely will a narcissist even mention that they may have the problem to begin with, and when diagnosed, they'll usually insist that there's no problem at all. Most of them are able to function well regardless, so it just doesn't even come up:
http://psychiatric-disorders.c...
So they either didn't evaluate you for this, or just plain missed it. This happens all the time, even with personality disorders that are easier to diagnose. I saw many psychiatrists before one told me that I had avoidant personality disorder. In all of those years prior, none of them even mentioned it once. They also may want to provide a supportive environment, and telling you that you are a narcissist doesn't help at all, so they'd prefer to not bring it up.
So even if your shrinks didn't mention it, that doesn't prove anything. In fact, it's rather perplexing to me that you can't even see it yourself, but again, that is also a common trait of narcissism and is therefore expected. Notice how you're reaching really really hard (and missing even harder) to try to prove that I'm lying...That's a behavior I would expect from somebody who is trying very hard to prove that they are superior or at least have some kind of moral high ground.
We've been over this before. You lie, repeatedly, and badly.
This is just you projecting. I have provided very good evidence of your fibs. Do you want me to link it again? Remember that you haven't even disputed any of it or even tried to offer an explanation.
Your infatuation with me and need to initiate the insults in an attempt to somehow "prove" that I should be unhappy with my decision makes you one sick fuck.
I haven't made any attempts at that.
And you really should stop with your accusations of narcissism.
It's not an accusation. That would be like saying I'm accusing you of being a transexual.
None of them is grounded in the real world.
Looks like you have something in common with them. Though honestly, I think it's just you who isn't grounded in reality, and so everybody else looks wrong to you. More on this below.
And I'm sure there are women who are just as bad. Addicted to Facebook or Twitter or Candy Crush or whatever. It really pisses me off when I visit other women for a get together and they ALL have their faces buried in their phones or tablets (and so do their kids).
That isn't my experience at all. At social affairs I go to, women are rarely engaged in their smartphones -- sure, they might pull it out once in a while, but they're usually talking to people around them. But if they're ALL doing it, then this is most likely a form of nonverbal communication: They're doing what they can to avoid making eye contact with somebody so that this person can't easily start a conversation, and they're sending a nonverbal message of "I don't want you to talk to me" to that person. This is something everybody does when they're around somebody that they don't want anything to do with, but at the same time they don't want any confrontation, and it's been happening since time immemorial. Before smartphones it was done with other things like books, newspapers, weaving baskets, solving puzzles, making art, and many other one-person activities that can be done around other people. Men and women alike do this.
In your case, I think it's pretty obvious who they're trying to avoid, and your quietly leaving is exactly what they wanted to happen. At social events, very few people bury their heads in their smartphones. The ones that really want to do this won't even come to begin with. The fact that you often see otherwise says more about you, not them.
By the way, I have many geeky coworkers, and not a single one of them is socially isolated, with all but two of them having kids (I am one of the two that don't.) And again, this is probably your experience because what they're really doing is trying to isolate themselves from you, so naturally you think you see many socially isolated people. And I'm sure you'll disagree, as narcissists often do in situations like these. Narcissists tend to think that all people inherently like them, unless they make obvious statements otherwise, and that everybody who doesn't like them is just a bad person. And of course, narcissists handle it very poorly when somebody doesn't like them. This is also why you get so upset when you see people buried in their smartphones instead of paying attention to you. (Don't deny this; you said, and I quote "it really pisses me off".)
Personally, on the rare occasion I see other people buried in their phones, it does not bother me at all.
Where the hell did I ever advocate for eugenics (even for you, because it's not necessary: you're never going to breed anyway)? Pointing out a problem situation isn't advocating in favour of it.
That's a line of BS, and you know it. You've for a very long time been talking down to people who you refer to as nerds simply because they don't agree with you, and you've mentioned with your own satisfaction that they'll be eliminated from the gene pool. By the way, my "nerdiness" has landed me another girlfriend; so much for your stupid theory. And quit fucking pretending that you speak for women -- you're not a woman, and you don't speak for them. They can speak for themselves quite well without your help.
I will, however, cop to favouring some forms of censorship. We have laws here against hate speech, and I think that's a good thing. And in case you haven't noticed, both Facebook and Google now censor certain types of posts (Facebook) and videos (youtube).
They only do it because it gets them advertising dollars, because advertisers don't like getting associated with anything controversial. Google did basically nothing about it until the wall street journal (right leaning, by the way) wrote an article about it, and the advertisers subsequently started pulling their ads; something they wouldn't have done if nobody had said anything.
The wall street journal likely did this because they they've been watching their own revenues drop with the rise of social media, basically as if to say that only media-industry published content is safe.
Furthermore, I'm not going to make my life's decisions on whatever facebook and google decide. If I did, then they would already have a complete dossier on everything there is to know about me, which they don't because I don't participate.
And as for militancy, I have engaged in both peaceful protest and legal action - for what I believe in. That's both my right and my responsibility in a democracy. As for "being militant" against you, I'm just giving you back some of what you've served me.
Nope, you specifically said, and I quote "I'll have the cops on your ass in minutes" (something that wouldn't happen, by the way, yet another one of your fucked up lies about Canadian law.) Furthermore, I have in no way been militant against you: I've never made any kind of threat against you, I've never suggested that you be arrested, and I've never suggested that there should be any government action against you. All of these would be militant behavior, and you've done all three to me.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Why? Because you have a problem with transsexuals. You don't believe that we can possibly be happier as women than we were as men, probably because you believe that men are innately superior to women.
No, I didn't say that it wasn't possible, I'm sure in a few rare cases it is, as I've mentioned before. However, as I've stated, I think the medical community is making a very grave a mistake by advocating this, and I strongly believe that this will (unfortunately) end up being another black eye on psychiatry, of which they already have too many, which is sad because it only sows distrust against the psychiatry field, which has done a lot of good for a lot of people.
The suicide rate among transexuals before, during, and after transition is 41%, even if they have nothing but full support from their friends and family and are happily employed. And in fact, University of Birmingham's ARIF, which is a very well respected group in the scientific community, has plainly stated that there's no robust scientific evidence that sex change therapy is clinically effective.
https://www.theguardian.com/so...
Speak of which, (something tangentially related) as for
Now, as a Libertarian, I fully support your right to getting mutilated to your heart's content (at your own expense), but if you think you're going to convince anyone that you're happier because you did so, well, you're delusional.
Agreed. And my opinions on this matter have been entirely from the perspective of critiquing the medical community. The US mostly has this right, (the process is far more stringent here) but other countries (including Canada, where Barbara is from) do the highly irresponsible thing of giving sex changes to children while doing relatively very little in the way of due diligence. The research has been very strong in that 70-80% of kids who express feelings of gender dysphoria just naturally grow out of it if there's no affirmation, and furthermore expressing no desire for it at all when they grow older and can make their own medical decisions.
There are plenty of guys whose life outside of work centers around video games. It's not limited to any one type of job.
If you weren't retarded, you could see that video games are one of the most social activities that exist. The first hardcore gamers pretty much exclusively played in arcades at bars with friends, and such an environment still exists today. Ever been to Dave and Busters? Of course you haven't, because nazi like yourself wouldn't ever be accepted there. Another common activity is LAN parties and tabletop RPGs (albeit the later isn't a video game.)
The closest you'd ever be to a bar with an arcade is the street corner offering services at 5 bucks a lay.
I personally love video games, and if there were more hours in a day, I'd probably be playing them. However, most of my evening is taken by 2 hours at the gym 5 days a week in addition to the extra sleep I require (both of these are used to control my hypertension, which is secondary to my iga nephropathy. I'm on the maximum dose of FIVE classes of anti-hypertensive drugs, and it's just not enough.)
Allow me to introduce you to Tom (Barbara) Hudson. He's a narcissist who jumped on the alt-left bandwagon, and because he hated white males, he paid to have his genitals removed. He hates me quite a bit just because I'm a white male (in spite of my making gestures of goodwill) and ever since then I've called him out on his BS lies.
He also shares much in common with nazis as he advocates a complete ban of anonymous speech (a la China) in addition to speech codes, and advocates penalties up to and including violence against those he disagrees with, plus eugenics, plus he's quite a bigot.
If ever there was an example of an alt-left...this is it, plain as day.
We're conducting a vast experiment in eugenics - will those "bros" who fail to breed in sufficient numbers eventually drop out of the gene pool, leaving the human race more resistant to becoming compulsively focused on a very limited set of activities, or is it like gambling and other addictions, where there will always be a sucker born every minute?
I think that pretty well tops off what I've been saying all along...
Militant against those who merely disagree? Check.
Lies in order to spread his message? Check.
Favors censorship? Check.
Advocates eugenics? Check.
You are, in fact, a Nazi...albeit the alt-left version.
That the Windows app store still sucks badly.
That hasn't been news for the last 5 years.
Being outnumbered is not being censored. It is only showing you that you have a minority opinion.
That would be fine and all if they hadn't assaulted the protesters unprovoked.
This is especially relevant in the current climate of having politicians and the media deciding who is a nazi and who isn't based on a whim. Or worse, groups like Antifa and universities like Evergreen State essentially being able to justify violence and censorship against anybody that they decide is a nazi, with the police and university staff only providing protection to the side making those accusations. Take for example, the Coulter and Milo speeches at Berkeley.
I'm not sure what you mean by "historical myth", however there are a few other things I want to add to this:
- Lincoln was an unabashed racist who believed in white supremacy
- Others have said "does Germany have memorials of Nazi era people" and the answer is:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And pretty relevant:
https://youtu.be/P3YtiQ_wXZo?t...
I didn't say it did preclude that, however it does show a lack of interest.
Animal rights activists do argue for better living conditions for farm animals.
Depends on which ones. Most vegans I've heard from want the practice banned entirely. PETA feels the same way, including banning any captivity of animals period, including pets and service animals.
I don't think that list is comprehensive, rather there is an explicit allowed and explicit disallowed with definitions for each, but none of that excludes these from being used. And these particular pesticides have no alternative for certain organic crops that would be allowed under the current rules in both the US and the EU, as stated by the organic lobby itself to the EU:
http://www.ifoam-eu.org/sites/...
A whitepaper about their toxicity to bees can be found here:
https://academic.oup.com/jinse...
Nobody is ever required to provide you a platform, but that isn't the point.
That doesn't actually apply to anybody, nor did it when the first person said it (who had no government guaranteed freedom of speech.) The idea is that in a well functioning democracy, everybody support's everybody else's right to free speech.
The perspective I'm looking at it from is that if you look at gender spread across different jobs, it's kind of obvious that men and women gravitate towards different types of work:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/me...
The #2 and #3 on that list alone pay pretty damn well, and as you can see they are overwhelmingly dominated by females. When males take the #1 job on that list, they typically get looked upon with distrust and that they don't belong simply for the fact that they're a male, but even so, I don't think that would at all be a reason that few men want that particular job, namely, most men I know have little tolerance for crying toddlers, and thus most would not like that job other than maybe a simple "it pays the bills," which is typically a reason why somebody might do substandard work.
That all said, I'm not sure the reasoning why we need to say that we must have 50% women in tech, and that anything else is one of "discrimination", "society's fault", or "men make the environment uncomfortable and/or hostile".
At least one female poster on slashdot pretty well hinted that she doesn't necessarily like the work, rather "it pays the bills":
https://slashdot.org/comments....
We're there to work, to make money, and to go home. That's all there is to it.
While there's nothing wrong with this attitude, in my experience, people with this attitude tend to be underperformers, which if that is true in your case, then it may further reinforce the stereotype at hand. I personally like the work that I do; and on occasion I'm known to stay an hour late at work because I was solving a problem that I found to be interesting.
Then by your definition, the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, the Adams National Historical Park, and a big long list of others are also revisionist history. All of these were built and/or dedicated in years ranging from at least 50 to over 100 after the death of the person they commemorate.
I never heard of this website before all of this went down, and I imagine many others haven't either.
I think the Streisand effect has been invoked, and the more you try to stamp it out, the worse it gets.
I'm still wondering whatever happened to "I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It"?
I don't know about BLM, but nation of islam certainly has and does. Antifa does as well, and yet:
https://www.gofundme.com/Antif...