yes! they are points on the continuum! thank you! now please stop acting confused because i won't specify further group identities.

no. an anti capitalist is a leftist. a "liberal" is a severely confused term today. i'm a liberal and i'm not a leftist or a conservative. a neo-fascist can be on either side of the spectrum. again, fascism is a highly confused term, apparently by you too. if a person thinks donald trump is a fascist and AntiFa are not, they don't understand the word. so basically the entire left.

so this is why i will continue to not use your dumb labels so feel free to stop asking.

Lul augie_ said "virtue signalers".

i'm not in charge of anyone's gender. nature (or god) is in charge of that one.

Pcfffffffft. Quit hiding behind thought experiments.

You are here in politics with messages about transgender people and their loved ones- you took upon that.

Countless virtue signals in a virtuous universe of variations which may look like signals.

Honestly augie_, your heart might be in the right place but your use of these terms is a huge tell about where you're getting your bad information from.

I don't know how you write the first paragraph and accuse me of intellectual dishonesty in the second. If I thought you were at all interested, we could talk about what that study is actually saying, and what its not saying, but you want to live in your r/conspiracy world and go on about how liberals are running some crazy plot to convince trans people to eventually kill themselves.

this should be good...i'll give you a few hints and you can guess where you think i get my "bad information" from.

my main form of media consumption is podcasts
i mainly listen to 5-6, maybe 7 on a regular basis

lol. conspiracy theorist, haven't been called that one yet. crazy plot to convince people to kill themselves, i don't even know what the hell you're talking about.

i think everyone's heart is in the right place. i think transgender people would be far better off if they attempted treatment for gender dysphoria as a first measure. i would never vote against their freedom to actually receive a transition. and i've been nice to the trans people i've met. they would say nice things about me. i've met plenty, i lived in vegas for 10 years. but go ahead, paint me as a monster because i've presented statistics and basic biology.

You keep referring to being described as being called.

It's comforting to some you say you are nice. But you aren't "it" and don't have "it" thanks to stats and biology. You aren't the boss of stats, biology, or transgender people. You are not being called, you've been told.

on a different but related note, there's another hypocrisy by the left that i've been thinking of lately. maybe someone will defend this one since nobody would defend the first one i set out.

ever since i was a kid, the argument for LGB rights (anyone remember when it was LGB?) was that sexual preference was born in. it was not a choice so it should never be discriminated against in any way. this is a view that i agree with. there are a million reasons why people become gay and it's obviously a mix of nature and society, with nature playing the greater role, but the ratio is different for everyone.

has that position evolved in any way? because it's at odds with the idea that a person can choose their gender at any time based on how they feel. or switch back and forth and be both genders. or some other gender (which means there are infinite genders and gender means nothing).

gender is OBVIOUSLY more biologically linked than sexual preference. you won't find sexual preference in our chromosomes but you will find gender. yet, gender is the choice? and who you want to have sex with was determined in the womb?

i'm the boss of you, boy, now leave me alone

What do you think the suggested treatment for gender dysphoria is?

Once more, You don't find gender in our genes, You find sex. You are either confused or a liar.

Dude, once again, these are your labels. Not mine, not anyone else... yours and only yours.

These are your labels: "Leftist", ""extreme left of the political spectrum", "radical left". We are trying to figure out WTF you mean by your labels. That's what this whole damn thread is about... trying to figure out who these pesky and mysterious SJWers actually are.

So, I'll make this really simple for you. As you use your words, when you call peeps "Leftists" and "Rightists", which of the following do you mean...

1. You are referring to the traditional US economic left-right scale.
2. What you are referring to has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the traditional US economic left-right scale.
3. It's complicated. But you will be happy to explain these complications to all of us here in Baja Politards.
4. You are nothing but a fool and a troll.

Dude, you're the one who wandered into this thread, asking engage these "Leftists" you speak of. As long as you keep attempting to chat about these "Leftists", without clarifying who these "Leftists" happen to be... it's a 100% relevant question. In fact... the conversation can't continue until this is clarified.

I promise you... I'll never tire of asking. That's what having a "productive conversation" is all about. So, why don't you make like a good little OSJer, and just flippin' answer the damn question...

A... B... C... or ... D ??

See you're described, not called. Your narratives about people don't serve them.

You have a very poor understanding of human biology and cultural development.

Yeah, ain't nobody got time for that, but 'virtue signaling' as a layperson's pejorative is totally a white supremacist thing. I thought that was common knowledge.

THEY DO!

THAT'S TOTALLY WHAT THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS!!!

Anything you've heard otherwise came from a crazy RWNJ source, probably where you also heard 'SJW' and 'virtue signaling'.

The position has evolved somewhat. The 'don't discriminate because it's not a choice' could be seen as a mistake. It doesn't matter a damn whether it's a choice or not.

Then again, it was formulated during a time when we were far more concerned that being openly gay commonly meant losing jobs, being beaten up, being ostracised and facing criminal charges. Back then, it not being a choice seemed to matter and we can be forgiven for not considering points such as 'it wouldn't be ok to criminalise them even if it wasn't'


If you stick around you will bet used to some of the more weird and wonderful approaches to debate around these parts. We have some limits on decency but otherwise feel free to ignore it, laugh at it or join in with enthusiasm.

More important is to avoid objectionable content. Do, for example, take care when discussing TG people and issues.

Watching this exchange is bringing me pure delight.

It's an argument that leftists will have to have over and over again. Because it's dumb.

So when you say "Leftists", what do you mean?

Do you mean anti-capitalists? Librulz? Donkeys? Elephants? Everyone who isn't a neo-fascist?

Or do you, like augie_ seems to be implying, and like a good little OSJer fool you are, use the terms "Leftist" and "Rightist" in ways that are completely unrelated to the traditional US left-right economic scale?

So far, every one of you OSJer fools seem to mean something entirely different than the last OSJer fool to wander through the thread. So, you'll understand how this discussion cannot really move forward until this whole "Leftist" and "Rightist" newfangled usage is clarified for all of us Baja Politards.

You know, you people. Yous. (Waves towards you freaks).

Which leftist told you this?

Leftists are the dumbasses. Rightists are the smart dudes.

Hope that helps.