bucho

Hey - I read through some of your post history to get the back story. I know we're strangers, but I just wanted to say that I'm proud of you, and I'm happy that you're seeing positive progress on your journey, even if it's just a "simple win". It's rough not being able to count on your parents to have your back. I hope you have someone else in your life to at least partially fill that hole, but if not... just keep posting, and keep going. Strangers on the internet being proud of you and happy for you is a poor substitute for parental affection, but hopefully it's at least something. You got this. <3

My bad! Another classic. Mel Brooks just does not miss.

Is it fair to say that Mel Brooks movies are uncommon now? Have they gotten old enough that people today are generally ignorant of them? If so, "Blazing Saddles", "History of the World: Part 1", "Young Frankenstein", and "Spaceballs" are incredibly worthy of a watch.

WTF is up with all the NSFW tags, and the massive ChatGPT-like spam?

I think that, in the moment, online arguments can feel extremely real and heated. But, then you go out and do other things, and it becomes less and less important over time.

Of course, then you come back and find a notification from one of those morons you've been arguing with, and then you're right back in it. So I guess just practice? Like, just keep reminding yourself that it doesn't actually matter, even if it feels like it does.

Also, shrooms help. I remember I got into a heated snit with some idiot online an hour or so before eating a bunch of caps. Then, when I was trying to explain what the argument was about to one of my friends, I couldn't finish because hearing myself explain it became apparent just how ridiculous the entire thing was. I think psychedelics just give you perspective that you're lacking in your normal day-to-day life.

I saw a loaf of Rosemary Focaccia on sale the other day, and it occurred to me that "Rosemary Focaccia" is a great drag name.

Hey - you'll get no argument from me that the Democratic party sucks, or that it's owned by the same lobbyists that own Republicans. That being said, the differences you outlined when saying that there's very little difference are big fucking differences.

Little difference, except their inept economic policies, and their absolutely shit social policies and refusal to accept climate change...

I don't know, man. Sounds like some pretty fucking big differences to me.

Yeah. I was thoroughly disillusioned by what the DNC did to Bernie. Really pissed me off. Still voted for Hillary, though, because her opponent is a literal monster. I hate having to make that kind of choice every 4 years: "vote for the shitty candidate who will do very little, or vote for an actual piece of shit who will do everything in their power to strip all of the progress we've made in the 20th century". It's awful.

I can’t say one single fucking word about how the trials related to trump are a complete out of control purely political witchhunt

I mean, you can say that all you'd like. Just don't be surprised when people judge you to be not very intelligent because of it. It is a profoundly dumb take, after all.

It's funny to consider "love of country" to mean "the food, certain people, and beautiful landmarks", while simultaneously condemning the actions of its government, and like half of the citizens who live there.

Not that I'm criticizing, mind. I struggled with this myself for a long time before finally coming to the realization that this country is like a problematic family. You're told that you should love it even if you don't like lots of aspects of it very much. Like an abusive parent.

I'm in my 40s now, and I've finally realized that that's bullshit. I don't love this country. I used to, but I've realized that I only ever loved the idea of this country while the reality has been a profound disappointment.

The barbecue is good, though. So that's nice.

You literally aren't reading a word I'm saying.

I've read everything you wrote. It's all profoundly stupid. You're trying to pretend that the phrase "assigned male at birth" means something it doesn't mean. You can look it up yourself, you know; you don't have to take my word for it. We live in an age of extreme information availability. So it's frustrating for me when you ignore all available evidence and cling to your stupid fantasy.

Again with you guys it all comes back to "you're denying our existence!!" when literally no one is denying your existence.

2 things: I'm not trans. Also, this entire comment chain started by you pretending that people were being banned because they pointed out that biological sex exists. When I pointed out that that was stupid and crazy and incongruous with reality, you doubled down. So how else am I to interpret your stance other than you love sticking your fingers in your ears, sticking your tongue out, saying "LALALA", and pretending that gender identity isn't separate thing from biological sex?

I'm sure you don't even see how dumb this argument you just made is. "I'm telling you what it means, therefor that's what it means even if what I'm telling you is wrong" lol.

I wasn't arguing with you in the same way that telling a schizophrenic that there are no demons around him isn't arguing. It's pointing out reality to a crazy person. If you're too dumb to look it up yourself, or too ideologically blind to believe the evidence you find, then it's not an argument. It's simply a person with way too much patience trying desperately to get you acquainted with reality.

Apart from all those who are.

Ok. I'll bite. I'm sure you'll have no problem linking me to any mainstream arguments that biological sex doesn't exist since you believe it to be so prevalent. I'm happy to read any evidence you provide.

Debatable still. The current use of gender is as a feeling, whereas previously it was intrinsically 1:1 linked to sex. This is what people are talking about when they say "gender ideology" and how they disagree with it. You think gender is simply a feeling. I don't.

It's not, though. Because on my side is practically the entire weight of the scientific community, and on your side is bigots and crackpots. Refer to my previous paragraph about why that's not a debate.