Mom said you have to stop being weird on the internet and that it’s my turn to use the computer.

I guarantee that you could tax rich people more without spying.

You know, the Germans had a word for people that voted for Hitler for economic reasons. It was Nazi. It doesn’t matter if you support people that want to forcibly de-transition people because they have a better economic policy.

In the end, if you don’t support human rights, you’re a bad person, and there are so many better people out there to be friends with who won’t disappoint you. And the logic that stems from this thinking is: If someone votes for people who will take away others’ rights… What will they do to me? If they won’t protect others, they won’t protect me. Regardless of if that is true, we can only judge people by their words and actions, and it’s a really easy way to judge.

It isn’t anyone’s duty to be these people’s friends. You can do it, but it’s really obvious why most people wouldn’t. It literally is a privilege to not be angry and threatened by these people. That wasn’t a dismissal of your argument, but a point for you to reflect on.

Once again, do not play the privilege card. Not on me, not on anyone. It’s not a convincing argument, and it has not a real base. And it’s somehow discriminatory towards particular groups that you do not consider “unprivileged enough”.

That is a really weird and illogical argument.

What happens if she ends up being right and in 2 years that party goes into power and do not do anything to hurt me? And I have to live my life knowing I cut a good relationship because something I was wrong about.

That is a really weird and illogical hypothetical. Best answered with, “But what if they kill you instead?”. We ALL have a line in the sand where if someone supports a thing, they cannot be our friend anymore. Like, if my friend started saying Nazi things, but was a “good guy” otherwise, they wouldn’t be a good guy at all. I would give them a chance to not be a Nazi, and then we would either not be friends or they wouldn’t be a Nazi. Everyone has that, regardless of what you say or think, and it is disgustingly easy to prove. I can prove it, if you’d like, but I feel like you have already lost this argument by ignoring the Amanda party.

Don’t play the privilege card on my.

I absolutely will. Because you are ignoring yours. Being a part of a disadvantaged group doesn’t mean you don’t have privilege elsewhere. In fact, sometimes, that is the reason why you might ignore your privilege.

You are able to be calm with your friend because you do not see there is a danger. People like your friend haven’t hurt you. But would everyone else do the same? Your friend supports people that will hurt people like you, but do they think they can stop those people from hurting you?

I would rather lose a friend who didn’t want me hurt but supported people who would hurt me because that is not a logical view, no matter how calmly it is spoken.

it’s not a central theme for either of us, but even when we talk about it we have never argue, just talk differences calmly and with respect, we never insulted each other because politics.

This is a privilege you have that others do not.

If, for whatever reason, you were under the threat of violence every day, do you think you could be calm and rational? If that threatened violence against you hanging over your head was perpetuated by members of a political party, would you be calm and rational about that party? If this was because of something you couldn’t change about yourself, like being queer or black or a woman, would you be calm and rational? Do you think everyone could? Do you think a child could?

I know I couldn’t. I see these people breakdown over and over again. For something they did not choose. Sometimes for not being calm or rational.

It is silly to expect people to act calm and rational in the face of overwhelming prejudice, in the face of threats to your self, family, and friends, in the face of adversity–or worse, ennui–to your situation.

Let me steal an argument from a video I saw. Pretend you are having a party, and someone comes up to you and says that your friend Amanda should be kicked out of the party, that she doesn’t deserve to be here, that she is drinking too much of your beer, and that if she goes, everyone can have more beer. You like Amanda because she is your friend and you know she is kind and funny. Let’s say you calmly and rationally debate this guy, but he adamantly repeats these things, over and over again. Do you think Amanda feels good at this party? Should you keep debating this loser? Or would you kick him out of the party, by force if necessary, because Amanda did nothing wrong? Now imagine this person says this about ALL Amandas. Do you think this changes the situation? What if someone else told you that this guy just really hates Amandas but he’s cool otherwise, even though he really harps on how Amandas are ruining this party. Do you think Amanda likes that second guy? Should Amanda be calm and rational to either of those two people?

Don’t hide behind the shitty half-assed news reports, you coward. Just name the actual Democrat that fired their vaccine board, so we can end this. Just name the actual Democrat that banned abortion federally, instead of posting fifteen useless articles. Just name the Democrat that kept child marriage protected because it’s easier. Just name the Democrat that deported my neighbor, specifically, since you seemed to have known him. Just name the Democrat that implemented a voting suppression measure, assuming you can find one within the last 25 years, instead of you saying that’s the same thing as ranked choice, which have been challenged by Republicans in every single instance (and this is the only instance you found for Democrats, if you could call it that, lol). Just name the Democrat that called queer people slurs openly and wants them tried for child sex crimes.

It should be so easy, right? If they’re the same, just fucking name them.

I don’t remember when the Democrats deported my neighbor or when they called self-proclaimed Nazis good guys or when they wanted to take away food stamps from single mothers or when they wanted to make voting harder or when they didn’t want to ban child marriage or when they wanted to take away the only source of food and housing for children, people with disabilities, and the elderly or when they wanted to ban vaccines or when they wanted to ban abortion or when they wanted to make being queer a child sex crime or when they ignored all of science, but I guess they were just too smart to do any of that.

And for clarification, the Minnesota protests weren’t cancelled. The governor merely told people to stay home while the police searched for the assassin, but they showed up at the Capitol anyway. Some of the government officials cancelled, but there were still some who showed up and spoke anyway, because Minnesota doesn’t let MAGA terrorists dictate what they do.

I always get extra disappointed by the Outer Worlds, because I always confuse it with the Outer Wilds and would rather play that game.

There are 23 movies in the Air Bud cinematic universe. Everyone always talks about the first Air Bud. The basketball one. The dog does a trick and boops the basketball into the hoop. Whoop-de-fucking-doo. If I’m on the losing team to that, I can applaud that. That’s fine, whatever, I’d hurt my nose doing that. Cool. The rest of the team played well, too.

Now imagine being a kid on a sports team six years later. You arrive to your beach volleyball court and see you’re playing against a dog. You might think, woah, the dog is just gonna boop the ball with his nose, right? Cool fucking trick, he’s old as shit and has no new ones. Wrong. In Air Bud: Spikes Back, the fifth Air Bud movie, the eponymous Air Bud jumps up to the net and spikes a ball down on the opposing team. If I’m on the losing team to that, I fucking quit volleyball forever. There’s no going back. Your dad doesn’t ask how the game was, he saw the dog spike that shit on you on ESPN. What were you supposed to do? My fucking bad, our libero is a piece of shit who can’t dig it up from a FUCKING DOG??? Where the FUCK is our middle blocker??? Which one of you pieces of shit let’s the dog go unmarked after that??? Slam the fucking ball into him, holy shit! No wonder we lost, they were too busy laughing their asses off while we floundered to get the ball over the net! Holy fucking shit, Andre, if you set the ball up so the FUCKING DOG GETS A CHANCE TO BLOCK ME WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU THE SETTER?!? No way, there is NO WAY anyone plays volleyball on that team again. Half that team kills themselves from the ridicule after that. The other half moves across the country and changes their names and faces. That dog ruins their lives. All to win a volleyball game.

An intersex person is typically assigned a gender at birth, but so is everyone else. Being intersex just means you aren’t biologically male or female (though I think this might also include people who have sex chromosomes that develop as though they were the other binary sex, but I’m not an expert). Most intersex people don’t typically know they are intersex, and thus they would count as cisgender so long as they identify as the gender they were assigned at birth and transgender if they do not. Thus, if someone had, say XY chromosomes, but was assigned female at birth, they would probably be cis if they identified as female.

However, trans can be a bit of a self-identifying label, and thus someone in that situation might just as well consider themselves trans. There’s a lot of different definitions for trans. Many non-binary people would consider themselves trans since they don’t identify as their assigned gender at birth.

Long story short, gender is complicated. Sex doesn’t change (put a couple asterisks here), but gender is super flexible (also asterisks here.)

Trans people were always joining the military at higher rates, and the reasons why are obvious. They were only able to be openly trans recently, but they have been able to be closeted trans since always. Just like gay people. Don’t ask, don’t tell, amirite?

When the government literally advertises the military as super masculine, you’re gonna get a lot of people that are either really into being ultra masculine and people that feel like they aren’t being masculine enough, which are certainly attributes that are likely to fit with people that feel gender dysphoria.

The other reason, of course, is that LGBT people are far more likely to be homeless from being cut off from their friends and family and have few alternatives, and the military is certainly one of the more effective ways to improve your economic situation.

This ain’t rocket surgery.

What does Trump’s executive order do other than say trans people are not allowed to exist then? I forgot the part where there was a carve out for trans people.

Imagine calling some a “virtue signaler” and then saying the words “Do I care? Nope.” Lmao.

So, what’s weird to me is that these people seemed to do just fine in the military, and are now being booted for being trans. So, what’s the problem? I mean, the obvious flaw is that not all trans people have to take hormones, and this ban targets people who don’t take hormones the same as those that do. But even if they did have to take hormones, they were doing fine before, so what’s the issue?

It seems silly to me that the military, with record low recruitment, would ban a population that has a far higher degree of joining them due to a lot of really shitty factors.

Do you want people to eat less meat, or do you want to feel superior to people because you eat less meat? Because it feels like the latter from all your comments here.

… Are you suggesting Republicans can’t coordinate or that they’re too stupid or unaware to fix any problems?

You are moving away from the main point, though, which is that all of this is the Republicans’ fault. They can stop this at any point, and if they don’t, then how are there any good ones?

At any point, Republicans could step up and stop any or all of this. It would take very few of them, and if there are good Republicans, as you say, then how many of them are there?

You’re not asking questions. You are pushing a conclusion with a question mark without information, and it makes you look like a clueless person because your information is easily identifiable as wrong, lmao.

The saying “you can’t butter a fly” is an idiom expressing that someone or something is too difficult to influence or manipulate. It’s rooted in the idea that butterflies, with their delicate nature, are virtually impossible to convince to do anything against their will, let alone “butter” them in a literal sense.