USA Today Names a Man One of Its ‘Women of the Year'

[Fishking]

The sole policy against transgender people that the Trump administration implemented and supported regarded sporting events?

Just post your claimed policies and stop dancing.

 

[Questerr]

Just post your claimed policies and stop dancing.

So I can entertain you and your sealioning pals?

 

[Fishking]

So I can entertain you and your sealioning pals?

Nope...because making vague claims without providing a source is ****ing dumb.

 

[Questerr]

Nope...because making vague claims without providing a source is ****ing dumb.

It was pretty dumb to elect an unqualified reality TV star and noted pathological liar to the presidency but that didn’t stop your ilk.

 

[Fishking]

It was pretty dumb to elect an unqualified reality TV star and noted pathological liar to the presidency but that didn’t stop your ilk.

More cowardice. Make a specific claim, at the very least, or wallow in your sheer bullshit.

 

[LouC]

Granted he was not the best communicator and had a poor demeanor.
However, what policies did you hate?

I guess if you like open borders, inflation, high crime, mandated medication and lockdowns, lousy withdrawal from Afghanistan, then Biden is your guy.

 

[Nilhus]

My opinions are based on scientific evidence, specifically the most modern studies in psychology, anthropology, sociology, and biology.

False! Psychology, psychiatry and sociology are completely pseudo-scientific - this is where trans theory comes from.

Biology tells us for certain that transsexuals are an anomaly - they fail to accomplish the basic function of sex from a biological standpoint: reproduction. Yes, anomalies do exists, some people are born blind, others without limbs, others with all kinds of diseases. So, science tells us the exact opposite of what you think! Citing morons with political agendas doesn't change the reality.

 

[Questerr]

False! Psychology, psychiatry and sociology are completely pseudo-scientific - this is where trans theory comes from.

Biology tells us for certain that transsexuals are an anomaly - they fail to accomplish the basic function of sex from a biological standpoint: reproduction. Yes, anomalies do exists, some people are born blind, others without limbs, others with all kinds of diseases. So, science tells us the exact opposite of what you think! Citing morons with political agendas doesn't change the reality.

Why does the rarity of a phenomena matter? What argument do you think your making?

 

[Outlook]

The sole policy against transgender people that the Trump administration implemented and supported regarded sporting events?

Some detail would be great, but obviously you can't provide that.

 

[HangLow]

What does a supposed "Gay Agenda" have to do with this? We're talking about gender dysphoria, not homosexuality.

As for the language zealotry, you tell me. Why are people arguing that the use of a biological definition of gender is, per se, wrong? I don't think I've participated in a thread like this where someone did chime in and say "That's not what gender means!"

​

 

[Airyaman]

Simply not true. There are plenty of non-conservatives that say otherwise. For a high profile non-conservative you have JK Rowling that says otherwise.

So "conservative" and JK Rowling. Cool, cool...

 

[Fishking]

So "conservative" and JK Rowling. Cool, cool...

No....JK Rowling isn't a conservative. Not even a little.

 

[Airyaman]

No....JK Rowling isn't a conservative. Not even a little.

Meant to make that plural, can see why you misunderstood...so the only ones who care are "conservatives" and JK Rowling.

 

[NatMorton]

View attachment 67380671​

That’s nice.

 

[LostinThought]

It was pretty dumb to elect an unqualified reality TV star and noted pathological liar to the presidency but that didn’t stop your ilk.

Yet you think it was a brilliant move to elect and completely corrupted pedophile, with a penchant for selling out his own country's best interest. Just so that he can line his own pockets and laugh behind your backs while doing so.

Yeah... I'll take the former TV host, loudmouthed jackass any day.

 

[Questerr]

Yet you think it was a brilliant move to elect and completely corrupted pedophile, with a penchant for selling out his own country's best interest. Just so that he can line his own pockets and laugh behind your backs while doing so.

Yeah... I'll take the former TV host, loudmouthed jackass any day.

Nope. I think Biden is a terrible President. I hope he has a stroke and dies today.

But he never would have been elected if Republicans weren’t so ****ing stupid as to to run Trump for re-election.

 

[NatMorton]

I think Biden is a terrible President. I hope he has a stroke and dies today.

That is appalling, and you really ought to start questioning your values.

 

[Questerr]

That is appalling, and you really ought to start questioning your values.

He’s human garbage. Everything he has done has held America back and his own personal actions have caused grievous harm to hundreds of thousands of people.

 

[Fishking]

Meant to make that plural, can see why you misunderstood...so the only ones who care are "conservatives" and JK Rowling.

There are plenty of non-conservatives that care. I just gave you a high profile one. A person would have to be a complete ****ing idiot to think she's the only one, especially when you take in moderates or centrist liberals.

 

[ProgressPlease]

Meant to make that plural, can see why you misunderstood...so the only ones who care are "conservatives" and JK Rowling.

Well, the right wing/conservatives are the ones who have been weaponizing and exploiting the issue. There are many many progressives, liberals, socialists, leftists who care very much.

 

[Airyaman]

Well, the right wing/conservatives are the ones who have been weaponizing and exploiting the issue. There are many many progressives, liberals, socialists, leftists who care very much.

They're not participating in this thread so far.

 

[LostinThought]

Nope. I think Biden is a terrible President. I hope he has a stroke and dies today.

But he never would have been elected if Republicans weren’t so ****ing stupid as to to run Trump for re-election.

I don't know, looking for an improvement in politicians is a standard here. I'd rather take the man who has higher chances, then risk the one who's already been shown to crack under pressure.