jerryskids

No I didn't, dummy. You are a blithering idiot. Answer my post. But you won't

The facts that BeachGuy has provided to substantiate him "mopping the floor with MAGATurds today!"

The "new rule," which isn't new, is some link to substantiate your feelz. You've provided zero. Got any? No? Here is mine, showing Biden's motivation: https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/views-of-the-israel-hamas-war/ Your party has 1/3 support for Hamas, and a much higher percent of younger people, who are Leftists like you. Not exactly the "only fringe college protests" you blindly espouse. I don't know why I waste my time, other than to curb stomp you, because your response will have no data whatsoever.

Post one fact, just one, about anything you support vs me. You claim "data boyo which opinions are not," yet you've posted zero point zero data. I'm seriously amazed that any company would fast track you to an almost CFO position who fundamentally doesn't understand what facts are.

You haven't posted a substantiated fact yet. Link? Anything? You are a blithering idiot until you do so.

Great post, thanks for the contribution.

This is what I quoted: You both responded to this. If @thegeneral denies this then I'm done, and will just conclude that he is a troll on this subject, because he clearly did so.

What does this mean? I suggest you let Tim die on/defend his own hill of the two week summer.

That's it for now. But I'm not sure you understand what you just agreed to, given that you consider "acceptance" of trans people a moral absolute. You agreed to a biological male who considers himself a female, NOT being in female safe spaces, if they still have boy parts. Go back and re-read if you'd like to change your position.

Fine, so we can agree and move on?

Again, no data. @Fnord has posted that this has occurred at his company, where he is a HR manager. If, as you assert, it is the equivalent of being struck by lightning... what is the objection to making a national policy?

Wow, thanks for posting this new info! Wait, it's already been discussed for several pages. Did you even bother to read them? Never mind...

With whom exactly, center right guy? He hasn't posted a substantiated fact yet.

Non responsive. I'll say again: you think your feelz are facts, yet they aren't, unless you substantiate them. You put nobody in their place. Sorry, I can't take you seriously.

I'm not saying they are women. I'm saying that, by having their male junk removed, they've shown a seriousness about their conviction. See my response to HT above for more.

Again, how do you legislate this? You are talking about a person with no boy junk who looks like she might be a guy. Do you disallow any women with extra testosterone from women's bathrooms?

And I'm being honest and real with you. You honestly and really never support your assertions with data. And then you double down by accusing people who provide data of feelz, while maintaining that your feelz are facts. If you want to have adult discussions, you should change this pattern.

Show us a single post you've made in this thread that you've supported with data. This should end this conversation quickly. Yet I suspect it won't.

What is your concern about a biological male who had his junk removed? And how would you differentiate this from a testosterone heavy woman, from a practical perspective?

I think we're in agreement: if shlong, no safe spaces. I'm not clear on what "biologically completed" means. He either has his junk or she doesn't. Edited to say "she doesnt". If a man reaches a point where he removes his boy parts, I think society can call that person a she for safe spaces. Still a no on sports, as those biological advantages were attained in puberty. Agreed?

Good on the sports. So you think that women should just get used to a much larger biological male in a locker room with his shlong dangling? We had a thread recently about whether a woman would rather meet a bear or a strange man in the woods.

Dubai does as well. That explains why I got the stink eye from a bunch of locals when my wife and I hopped on a subway. Luckily we only went two stops, so I didn't need to go John Wick on their asses.

I'll go Kelly. Markle is younger and I'd think has a harder body, but she seems like a prude who would check her hair in the mirror during sex. I've listened to Kelly enough to think that she might get her kink on.

Thoughts on my response to you?

Well, this is certainly a different take on my concern about Marxism and moral relativism...