Matrix Morpheus

Then you would be like this guy 3i1r4c.jpg (click to show)

Recognize him?

That's a whole lot of ignorance you're talking about.

I'd say you are a chump.

Chump

Poor chimp, always moving your empty boxcars onto side rails.

"Convicted con artist"? You've got your facts wrong.

Right, sorry. He settled his Trump University disputes.

He's still a con artist.

Wouldn't surprise me - he's a politician, after all.

No, a politician knows how to lie convincingly. He’s an obvious self-serving hack.

"Oh....so, it's perfectly ok to assume my religious beliefs...based on a comment from someone else...but it's not ok to call someone by their given name...?"

The name they gave you was JustineWhite9, and then later Justin, and then later asked you to call them Justine. You refused. Assumptions are perfectly okay, this is something I disagree with the Transgender community, actually. I never said they weren't. You are free to assume until evidence suggest otherwise. There is a difference between willful ignorance and actual ignorance. The latter of which should be treated with some capacity of generosity and patience. The former usually requires a bit more to shake things up.

"Who are you having this conversation with...? Who "refused to take place" (I think you mean "refused to participate", which also didn't happen)...?"

You. You at first refused to participate (thank you) in my experiment to identify trans by looks. It is entirely possible for them to pass as the opposite gender. Therefor it is problematic to assume because someone /looks/ masculine or feminine that it can be irrational to propose anything legal that discriminates them for "their benefit" or the "benefit of children"

I am not advocating for children to transition, or any physical alterations. Ideally, the parents would let their children be themselves and as they are developing, they should be free to explore that. However, to refuse to assign their children a gender, I find that most egregious an error. Or for them to let their child decide their gender. I'm against them taking medication that would alter their physiologically based solely on "gender-norms" until they've at least reached adulthood.

I've said this before elsewhere, happy to repeat it. Too bad you just assumed that I agreed with entire ideology. Perhaps if you had constructed your argument a bit more reasonably and rationally, instead of emotionally, this would have been cleared up in fewer comments.

Oh, further apologies. I had to write this in notes due to imgflip's comment limits. Perhaps we should trade emails? Then again, no way to private message here. Too bad.

My grammar and spelling are perhaps not on par but if you're incapable of understanding me, I'll try harder to improve them. I may not be putting my best effort forward because I, admittedly, think my efforts are entirely futile. Still, it passes the time. And you're lonely, and I'm more than happy to oblige.

Do you know what I find that's silly? Taking things entirely too seriously. Again, I'm not offended by what you say. The whole point of coming on here is to find different perspectives. I unusually don't enjoy much in the way of self-gratification or vindication as you may seek. I seek... opportunities to disenfranchise the clever and predictable ideas and actions of our representatives. I have an idea of how things are going to go.

Hell, I just had some kind of fascinating dream about Hillary and Gabbard were on some kind of reality show. Hillary was given a golden brick. Which, if you're familiar with the H2G2, is apt. And Gabbard was given a silver feather duster. They laid them beside other rulers which I took to mean Biden, Warren, and the rest of the Democrat hopefuls. Strangely, Bloomberg was a toothbrush. Something you'd clean your teeth with, but instead it had been used to scrub the bathroom floor.

Again, I meant no offense while posting all this. In one of your last comments, you seemed offended that I had not answered a single one of your questions. I had. Perhaps not in a capacity acceptable to your intellectual integrity.

The notifications were deleted due to a copy&pasting from notepad before I realized some of the pasting had been done. And that I had not proofread some of the individual comments. I believe it was two pages long. But I felt it important to answer your silly questions as you so patiently have done some of mine. At least, the more interesting ones.

It is good we agree on the concept of projection. You may very well be right. The grandkids can only visit for such a short while, and I'm afraid I can only try my best to stay in touch with their interests. Fortunately, Hollywood has run out of ideas so there are very few new things for them to be interested in. Star Wars, Star Trek, Lord of the Rings, Muppets and a ton of 80s movies. I think I really liked the 80s. I miss rigidly defending a Republican president that the media tried, and failed, to seem incompetent. I can only hope to be wrong now.

I maintain that your projection is one of offense. It may not be easy for you to understand, but people can object to something without being offended. People can argue with someone without being offended. Someone can possess a greater understanding of something without being a pompous jerk. And people can insult someone without the use of personal digs and cheap shots.

Forgive me, I'll answer all your questions then. Apologies for the multiple comments. I respectfully ask you reply to just one comment instead of each of them individually. It would be easier for both of us, I think.

"If you have a p**is, you ought to dress like a man. If you have a va**na, you ought to dress as a woman. For thousands upon thousands of years, this wasn't a problem, with certain exceptions at the deaths of other civilizations.

Now it is. Why?"

I did answer this question. "You’re right, for thousands of years this wasn’t a problem. So who is making it a problem? People telling other people how to be? Or people trying to be themselves?"

"What is wrong with you? Are you drunk tonight?"

Ah, one I missed. Well, two. Most of these questions took place in the morning, however as most of my drinking is done in the afternoon. I do occasionally roam the comments if I'm alone at the bar and the guys are a bit late. Usually, I'm more positive when I'm drunk. :)

""Dressing" does not just include clothing. You know that, right...?"

Yes. That's obvious.

"If I identified as a toaster, does that make me a toaster...? If I said "I'm just trying to be myself!!!", and said that "myself" is a toaster, in all opposition to the evidence in front of your eyes...does that make it true...?"

Biologically speaking? No. But who am I to argue with a toaster?

""If you identify as a toaster, be a toaster!" And when I try to give myself what nature didn't...a means to plug myself in to an electrical outlet...and suffer injury as a result...then what?"

So, your primary concern is self-harm. Cool. If it's physical harm, self-mutilation is consistent and normal through-out human history. Style, or dressing as you so put it, is not immune to physical altercation. What levels of physical alternations have been considered socially acceptable have changed throughout the centuries. Changing one's gender does carry physical risk, but no more risk than any other surgery may potentially carry physically. They can still function as normal human beings. As for the emotional stability, well, psychological tests are done on such individuals that go to extreme lengths to alter their physical form to match their psychological form. My key position is that so long as safeguards are in place to protect those who would genuinely wish to transition versus those who would transition for shallow or nefarious means, then I don't see anything wrong with it. Even with the suicide rate among most transgenders (some who've not even gone through surgery or any physical change), there are many factors to consider why someone might take their own life. Is their unhappiness the result of a mental imbalance or the result of a external source? When you willfully insult them and refuse to accept a group of individuals, it is natural for them to feel neglected and suicidal. I've already covered that even if you define transgenders as mentally ill, it is not a good idea to upset them. Not because they may do harm to other people, which is unlikely but not impossible, but themselves.

"Oh my. I've really offended you, haven't I...?"

Not at all! What gave you that idea?

"On a scale of 1-10, how close am I to the truth...? No need to answer; I'm obviously right on the money."

Well, if you say so. I don't personally see myself as intellectually superior though I do apologize if I come off as so. It is not my intent to make people feel apprehensive toward me. Just their silly ideas. Though, I'm sure I fail at that spectacularly. If you must know, I see myself as an idiot. Passing through. Helping out when I can. Learning.

"I don't celebrate "christmas"...it's a pagan "holy day", after all...but whatever you do to keep yourself content and out of trouble this time of year, you should do."

"Actually Yule is the pagan holiday and, chronologically speaking, it doesn't coincide with Christmas at all. True, ancient Christians adopted the festive aspects of Yule. Because their primary goal was to recruit these pagans into their religion. The ye old, "you attract more flies with honey than vinegar method." I miss ancient Christians. They were pretty groovy. Though the did have a poor tendency to get violent when they didn't get their way.

Hey dude. Have some cheesecake! It’s a little dry but the cherries help.