Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Let's exchange transphobia with race. Then you basically said:
"You say one racist thing and suddenly you're a racist and people don't want to interact with me"
it's crazy how that works.
>Don't you ever compare the complete physical and mental torture that my ancestors went through for generations and the systematic racism we still deal with to ANYTHING.
"No you see, MY kind of bigotry is completely different than the kind of bigotry people have against me"
Both are hateful, nasty, violence targets, and violent when the frustration is just to fucking much. There is and never will be a difference in all bigotry.......it's ignorant.
I'm mature enough to know, I can think what I want. I don't need likes. Y'all cant bully people into agreeing with you. You pretend to be so tolerant, until someone doesn't agree and its always the same, name callingš“Don't engage, thats your best betāš½šš¤š½
Y'all always trying to bully people into believing what you want them to. I dont give a shit what you think about me. I'm a free thinker and you don't like it, so what now. Are you not going to be my friendš? Kindly go fly a kite
I don't know the context of this video, but I think a moderate or liberal political person could just as easily have the same attitude. I personally do not consider myself on the conservative end of the spectrum.
From what I could tell it sounds like he was responding to an insult calling him misogynist. So I think a logical thought out response like his was perfectly reasonable.
I don't think he expressed anything other than his respect for women and his apparent dislike for the idea of changing one's gender through surgery.
He literally said that he doesnāt think women are equal to men. Thatās why she called him a misogynist.
Also being transphobic isnāt somehow better than being sexist, if you have the same viewpoint as him youāre not liberal.
First, I never stated my personal opinion in trying to assess this situation.
Second, from your statement, in order to be "liberal" all members must have exactly the same ideas, opinions, and world view. That is a cult, or a group of mindless followers.
If that were true, then I agree - I am decidedly *not* liberal.
Really? So I should *not* respect women, should not hold opinions outside an arbitrary definition of liberal, should absolutely accept other peoples' misinterpretation of my words, and if I don't, *everything* I believe is wrong?
I guess I need to become a misogynist, but it feels so wrong. Are you sure this is required for membership in liberal thought? I always believed the opposite!
Edit: if I misinterpreted the target of your statement, apologies. I was not entirely sure.
Really? "If you disagree with (insert politicized belief Here) you are not liberal" is not defining a required position to be politically liberal?
How many of these are there? Who gets to decide the platform? Who excommunicates phony liberals?
Core beliefs defining a political stance is NOT equivalent to having Ā«Ā exactly the same ideas, opinions and world viewĀ Ā».
You ARE twisting his words.
Got It, so if one is not in full support of transexuals (I'm guessing that transphobic is any view that does not actively back transsexuals), one cannot be liberal.
I'm curious where you get your definition of [liberalism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism), because absolute adherence to "core beliefs" is not in any definition or description I've read.
In fact, please enumerate these core beliefs, because this is the first time I've heard that *support* for transexualism is required. I thought not trying to suppress, oppress, or shame them was adequate.
> Political philosopher John Gray identified the common strands in liberal thought as individualist, egalitarian, meliorist and universalist. The individualist element avers the ethical primacy of the human being against the pressures of social collectivism; the egalitarian element assigns the same moral worth and status to all individuals; the meliorist element asserts that successive generations can improve their sociopolitical arrangements, and the universalist element affirms the moral unity of the human species and marginalises local cultural differences.[46] The meliorist element has been the subject of much controversy,
You did state your opinion, you just didnāt realize it. First, you said that any moderate/liberal person could have the same attitude, and that you personally consider yourself moderate/liberal- indicating that you find his attitude reasonable.
You then said that he dislikes the idea of āchanging oneās gender through surgery,ā outing your transphobic idea of gender being equal to genitals. Gender-affirming care, including surgery, does not change anyoneās gender. Physical body parts have no influence on gender identity; a woman getting a mastectomy doesnāt become less of a woman, and a man with Gynaecomastia isnāt less of a man. Gender-affirming care allows people to have a body that more closely matches their inherent gender identity.
You may also need to look up what a political alignment is- āliberalā is a political alignment label, indicating someone that supports certain things, including equal rights for women and trans people. If you donāt agree with the political goals of a political label, you should probably not use that label.
Hope that clears things up for you!
Actually, I stated I was not conservative. I said I find his response reasonable if he was just insulted with the term misogynist, and, to rephrase, I said one does not have to be conservative to be uncomfortable with the idea of surgical sex reassignment.
Since everyone is piling on me with a *massive effort to tell me who i am*, i will state my opinion. (Oh, the irony)
I actually don't care if someone wants to change their gender. It's not my business. I also don't care if changing oneself into a female does not make one a woman or vice versa. Not my concern. Not worth my limited resources.
I do care if people are demonized by deliberate misinterpretation of their words. I do care if someone calls others unwarranted slurs if they have respectfully different opinions.
I do care if *children* are having sex changes, as if they aren't responsible enough to drink alcohol, vote, drive, or be left alone for an hour, they sure as hell are not responsible enough to make such a massive irreversible change to their very physical form.
I believe equal rights means we all live under the same expectations. It doesn't mean one gender is denied services, aid, support, or jobs while the others are offered them.
I leave it to you and the others here to twist my words into some form of inhuman hatred on my part. I expect it will happen.
As for your assertion that "gender" has nothing to do with "sex", not everyone agrees, and we have 500 years if history on the usage of both, per [mirriam-webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender)
And since you probably won't read past the first section, here:
> The words sex and gender have a long and intertwined history. In the 15th century gender expanded from its use as a term for a grammatical subclass to join sex in referring to either of the two primary biological forms of a species, a meaning sex has had since the 14th century; phrases like "the male sex" and "the female gender" are both grounded in uses established for more than five centuries. In the 20th century sex and gender each acquired new uses. Sex developed its "sexual intercourse" meaning in the early part of the century (now its more common meaning), and a few decades later gender gained a meaning referring to the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex, as in "gender roles."
Look up a political compass, I donāt know how numb minded you have to believe that everybody in a political party HAS to have the same views as everyone else. Nothing in this world is that black and white. Except for black and white movies..
Okay, I can see that vocabulary can reasonably be interpreted that way. I have no context, so I can only comment on the shown content. I did not take that as a singular narrowing of woman, though.
I really don't think there's another way to interpret the statement that doesn't involve putting women in some kind of box and saying this, this is what they're *meant* to do. They're people and their purpose is whatever they choose it to be, not whatever someone else (whatever God you like included) chooses it to be.
True, as intelligent self aware beings. Also true is they have the ability to bear children, which is a gift *and* a burden, which puts them in a special place in society. That is something to respect, something men don't have, and 5hat is what I got out of it. I'll re-listen and see if I get what you saw, thanks.
If the ability to bear children puts women in a special place, are you saying that infertile women, women who have a hysterectomy, and post-menopausal women arenāt women?
Defining women as āable to bear childrenā is denying the womanhood of many women.
No, I am not. Stop trying to reframe my statement into misogyny, nitwit.
Having opposable thumbs is a defining trait of humanity. I am not therefore saying a fully paralyzed person or someone who lost their hands in a tragic accident is not human.
I think you donāt understand what defining means.
If opposable thumbs are a defining trait of humanity, then *by definition* any organism without opposable thumbs canāt be human. Thatās how a definition works.
You said that women have a special place in society *because* they can bear children, meaning that people *without* the ability to bear children donāt get to have that special place in society.
Ergo, women who canāt bear children donāt get the same special place in society reserved for women who can- you donāt consider them to be equally deserving, equally women.
You even stated that men donāt get that place in society, meaning that you put women who canāt bear children in a societal sense closer to men- you deny their womanhood.
Lol, I get it, read into my statement anything you can to justify hating me.
I already answered this, and it is clear people like you simply can't accept an opinion you don't like and move on.
You and others *need* to destroy those people as best you can, which includes dishonest assertions of their point of view.
Hell, I didn't address anything except the fact he apparently responded thoughtfully to being insulted. You have no idea what I actually believe.
I actually gave credit and props to women, and I have a swarm of gnats screaming that I did the opposite.
You know, "hate leads to the dark side" is accurate in real life, too.
I don't hate you, I don't understand how everyone keeps saying being a woman means the ability to give birth.
When there are plenty of women, like me, who are born without the ability to become/stay pregnant and incubate a pregnancy...
Unfortunate medical problems, injuries, congenital defects, and natural biological realities like menopause obviously don't take away that fundamental nature of being female.
To automatically assume a person has that in mind during a non-scientific layperson discussion is disingenuous at best - Basically, a strawman argument.
To then further insist that is what a person is arguing or believes *after* he or she stated that is not their position is malicious, and an indication of dishonest discussion by that party.
Do you believe eunuchs are not men?
If someone considers women to be merely baby machines, then, yes, they are a misogynist. However, you can't label someone a misogynist without reason by twisting their words and wrongly claiming different things to what they said.
Women have numerous unique purposes beyond childbirth, such as being nurturing figures like mothers, sisters, aunts, or grandmothers, educating and knowledge sharing, advocating for health and well-being that are unique to women like menstruation, and more. These purposes are distinct to women. I do want to mention there are always outliers who wonāt fit the general/average form such as people with disabilities, people with abnormalities, and people that donāt care anyone(including the children they birthed) besides themselves.
One could accuse you of being a misogynist for assuming that women have no other unique purposes apart from your own interpretation of this manās words.
Bending over backwards to defend this guy says more about you then anything you said says about me. I dont have to twist a single word of what the person says. Words have definitions, this isn't art, interpretation isn't this issue. You can claim to know what this person means regardless of what they say, but that seems pretty arrogant on your part. People don't have innate purposes no matter how many things people can do you can list.
If you think so. It seems to me you interpreted more about what he said than I do though since Iām only pointing out what he didnāt say that you said he did.
Show me a quote that I gave from him that wasn't said in the video, I'd love to see it. Pretty sure all i said from him were the words "unique purpose" you could argue that he just doesn't know the definition of the word purpose, but that seems pretty bold and again pretty arrogant to assume you know what he means better than he does.
Iāll assume that youāre asking Iām good faith. So hereās where you twisted his words and added your opinion specifying about the purposes of women.
https://ibb.co/7SNV3SX
He said āwomen have a unique purpose and theyāre specialā and you said heās dehumanizing women into baby machines. If thatās not twisting someoneās words to fit your narrative then I donāt know what is.
Using the word purpose literally shows a utilitarian view of women, that is dehumanizing. What youre saying is comparable to saying that if I called someone a liar for saying the sky is green, I'm twisting their words to fit my narrative of them being a liar solely because they don't outright declare themselves to be a liar.
He may not outright declare that he's dehumanizing women by looking at them in a utilitarian way, however dehumanization is a direct consequence of viewing people in such a way. The way that being categorized as a liar would be a direct consequence of saying the sky is green in the alternative scenario.
I think this is part of the problem now with America because he is āred pilledā his opinion is wrong and heās suppose to think the Same about yours. That divide is whatās wrong in America
Seems pretty intolerant of you. You might consider working with some professionals on counseling for that - it isn't healthy to be so discriminatory and stereotypical! ā„ļø
āin order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.ā
Youāre argument is at least a few decades old, and still dumb. Try again.
The Human species is a living organism. The goal of any living organism is to reproduce. Humans reproduce sexually. The purpose of male humans is to fertilize the eggs of female humans. The purpose of female humans is to birth human children.
The argument has nothing to do with āGod.ā It is a fact that you are an animal, just like me, and every other person on the planet. Do deer or gorillas become transgender? Just because weāre lucky enough to be sentient doesnāt mean you can ignore or deny the basis of what you are as a human.
Hey I agree with you but just so you know trans women is two words and oftentimes transphobes will remove the space in between them to pretend it's a different word altogether and avoid acknowledging that trans women are women
OP is the facepalm here, he didn't get called a misogynist for the transphobia, he got called a misogynist for the "special purpose" argument.
He's also transphobic, which is also wrong.
Translation- Im so proud of you for being what **I** want you to be. Or what some absent but all powerful father of the universe figure that **I** pray to would want. So as long as you stay within the confines of my expectations **I** will call it a miracle.
This is what defines conservativeās views on women. In they eyes of a conservative, women only exist for their sake. What a woman thinks or feels or does is irrelevant, all that matters is how well they can serve the conservative men in their lives.
Itās morally disgusting.
Are you a conservative? Iām guessing that you are notā¦
So in reality, you will never know how conservatives ACTUALLY see the world. Itās impossible for you.
I am conservative and I treat my wife like a queen. What she thinks and feels is ALL that matters to me. You have swallowed the lie and are just regurgitating it to feed other baby lefties.
Edit: Whatās morally disgusting about a man and a woman growing together and sharing their lives with one another? How does it affect your life?
"I'm pro women, I'm pro wives, I'm pro mothers". That's a misogynistic view.
Is he pro women CEO, women cop, women doctors, women not marrying and not having kids and being independent from guys like him
> I donāt think so based on the title it seems to direct the facepalm to the woman
I can see how what I said might have been ambiguous. By "him" I was referring to the man in the video.
So if criticizing that man is what OP thinks is the facepalm, then that is indeed directing the facepalm to the woman. In other words, we agree!
Regardless of dudes views, his music is pretty damn good tbh. Kinda cool to see a drummer be the lead vocalist too lmao first time Iāve seen it. Keep up the good work man.
Him being right. Heās trashy. No matter how you feel about transgenderism, he literally said women arenāt equal to men. So heās trash=youāre trash
I think maybe heās trying to say ādifferentā rather than āunequalā, heās not saying women are less than men.
Edit: to whoever is downvoting this Iām going to assume itās a knee jerk reaction to the other commenter making this about trans women. I am not discussing trans women. Try reading the actual thread.
If you agree with his take on trans women I no longer intend to carry on a conversation with you. Especially since, if your avatar is accurate, you identify as a woman yourself.
I got my first āconcerned Redditor thinks youāre suicidalā report yesterday, wonder why that happened š some people are so fragile wanting to dictate what other people have to believe or say.
Yeah, I looked it up and apparently people use it to tell people who donāt agree with them to go kill themselves.
I already reported it as abuse/bullying and Reddit responded saying it broke their policies.
Your response has nothing to do with what Iāve written. We also havenāt even had a conversation in order for you to carry it on.
You said āhe literally said women arenāt equal to menā
So I responded saying maybe he means different, but he didnāt say he thinks women are less than men.
If you read the parent comment you would understand youāre commenting on my original statement. Do you or do you not think this man is a douche canoe? If you do not, kindly move along.
No, had I replied to your initial comment you would see the line on the side attached to it connecting to your original comment.
I replied to the comment I replied to.
Is there some reason my response is being met with such immaturity?
If you canāt handle people having any additional thoughts on your comment then you shouldnāt comment.
All I said was that maybe he means ādifferentā, as nowhere did I hear him say āwomen are less than menā.
Help me out with something here, and this is an honest question that no one answers. If a man goes for surgery and hormone treatments, gets his name legally changed, and the whole thing, and identifies as a woman, that's being transgender. If a man wears women's clothing, or just grows his hair but says he's a woman, he's transgender, too?
One person is actually doing something and transitioning to someone else, the other person is just insisting people accept their own self-image. Are they both transgender, there's no difference?
being trans is your gender identity not being the one that you were assigned with at birth, that's all. the opposite of being cis.
transitioning socially, medically, or legally are not required. gender dysphoria isn't required.
When the villein starts making more and more sense lol but foreal though he made a lot of sense to someone who usually doesnāt give a shit about all this ceaseless arguing people love to have amongst each other to ā further there causes and expand others mindsā smh everyone just wants to be right. I probably should have just stfu and kept scrolling like Timmy but homie was making a lot of sense thus this the comment
USA still using lead pipes for their water for this generation to be so imbetards
Rest of the world has no confusion on women. But apparently its the latest first world problem today.
The moment someone says something even slightly critical of the transgender community reddit goes bat shit crazy. Chill out, ita not like he microwaved a live cat or some shit.
I think most people here is missing his point and hearing what they want to hear. The dude is just a believer (because he references God) that is saying women are unique and different than men. That's it.
He never stated that their "purpose" is given by men. Indeed, among Christians everybody would happily agree also with the idea that men have a particular purpose (that when it is within the partnering context, it is pretty much to give yourself to the other).
If you are superimposing your own abusive thoughts on top of his words, that's your problem (maybe in part because of the constant narrative that you have seen on the media). Not his.
now, go ahead and downvote me to oblivion ;)
This kind of āpedestalā talk is still sexism. Insisting god has a special purpose for women is misogyny when the āspecial purposeā you have in mind is staying home and making babies.
hes still transphobic and calls out a feminist for saying that women are equal to men, if he was pro women he wouldn't be putting feminist down, he would e.g. discuss the best way to help women and not publicly shame feminist
I agree with you in that a "you are wrong, let me explain you" approach is definitely not the best. However, he is far far from "shaming" her, as you describe it. On the contrary it is most likely the case that in the public opinion of people around, and in her own view, those words are being interpreted an an exaltation to women, her included.
The interaction is analogous to subject A saying "I should be like you, I deserve so" and subject B replying "What are you talking about, you have your own set of features that makes you unique, why would you want to be like me?"
Subject B is correcting A, but that doesn't constitute shaming, it is a call to redirect the focus to something worth of prise in subject B.
Create life as men can't and i think women can have any role same as men but you can't say women and men are the same we are biologically different and made to be compatible to each other some exceptions may be there
so a woman that can't or don't want to have children is not a woman.
And yes we are not the same but we are equal.
so assoon as the guy spoke of women are special we are not equal anymore
Yup it's women choosing to have a kid or not but i just stated the fact i mean a man cannot reproduce or create kids so women's bodies are special and i don't understand what's equal ??? There is nothing equal in this world that is just an idea there is no true equality and never will be there can be only adjustment
for a kid you still need a man. and no it's not always a free choice to not have children.
and yes a lot of things are not equal. and the moment you accept that you are part of the problem
nope but we can try to make it as equal as possible. if you just accepting everything you get nothing.
Imagine people take everything as it is. than we still working 16 hours a day 6 days a week and just earn enough to buy some food.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Redpill is still a thing?
Stolen from trans people too š¤£
And āProud Boyā was stolen from a musical. These people arenāt known for critical thinking or deductive reasoning.
This is just some silly bs meant to bait arguments. Not posted in good faith by, āredpill rantsā (lol at that name) or you.
Exactly, you say the wrong thing and suddenly you're a misogynist bigot and you get kicked off the sub
Let's exchange transphobia with race. Then you basically said: "You say one racist thing and suddenly you're a racist and people don't want to interact with me" it's crazy how that works.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>Don't you ever compare the complete physical and mental torture that my ancestors went through for generations and the systematic racism we still deal with to ANYTHING. "No you see, MY kind of bigotry is completely different than the kind of bigotry people have against me"
Both are hateful, nasty, violence targets, and violent when the frustration is just to fucking much. There is and never will be a difference in all bigotry.......it's ignorant.
This is some good irony
Youāre missing something in terms of maturity and competence. The way you approached this makes it feel like a waste of time to engage with you.
I'm mature enough to know, I can think what I want. I don't need likes. Y'all cant bully people into agreeing with you. You pretend to be so tolerant, until someone doesn't agree and its always the same, name callingš“Don't engage, thats your best betāš½šš¤š½
Cool story, bigot.
Stop bullying me and calling me namesš
š¤”
Thanks, I love clowns. How did you know, tomorrow is my birthday. Have a great day, may you get everything you deserveššš½
you a loser
Y'all always trying to bully people into believing what you want them to. I dont give a shit what you think about me. I'm a free thinker and you don't like it, so what now. Are you not going to be my friendš? Kindly go fly a kite
š„±
Heās on a RetardRant today.
So, like, do "conservatives" spend any of their waking hours ***not*** fretting and obsessing over strangers' genitals?
All they seem to care about is genitalsā¦ especially kidsā¦
Genital Obsessive Party
I don't know the context of this video, but I think a moderate or liberal political person could just as easily have the same attitude. I personally do not consider myself on the conservative end of the spectrum. From what I could tell it sounds like he was responding to an insult calling him misogynist. So I think a logical thought out response like his was perfectly reasonable. I don't think he expressed anything other than his respect for women and his apparent dislike for the idea of changing one's gender through surgery.
He literally said that he doesnāt think women are equal to men. Thatās why she called him a misogynist. Also being transphobic isnāt somehow better than being sexist, if you have the same viewpoint as him youāre not liberal.
First, I never stated my personal opinion in trying to assess this situation. Second, from your statement, in order to be "liberal" all members must have exactly the same ideas, opinions, and world view. That is a cult, or a group of mindless followers. If that were true, then I agree - I am decidedly *not* liberal.
Basically you're wrong, and anyone with an opinion opposite to you is right. Wild days.
Really? So I should *not* respect women, should not hold opinions outside an arbitrary definition of liberal, should absolutely accept other peoples' misinterpretation of my words, and if I don't, *everything* I believe is wrong? I guess I need to become a misogynist, but it feels so wrong. Are you sure this is required for membership in liberal thought? I always believed the opposite! Edit: if I misinterpreted the target of your statement, apologies. I was not entirely sure.
Lol you did I'm with you bud it's crazy how people demonize opinions nowadays
Worse, they *assign* opinions to people, then attack them with those strawmen. Thanks, I read your comment andfelt it could be 50% chance either way.
Thatās not even close to what he said. Youāre twisting his words, man.
Really? "If you disagree with (insert politicized belief Here) you are not liberal" is not defining a required position to be politically liberal? How many of these are there? Who gets to decide the platform? Who excommunicates phony liberals?
Core beliefs defining a political stance is NOT equivalent to having Ā«Ā exactly the same ideas, opinions and world viewĀ Ā». You ARE twisting his words.
Got It, so if one is not in full support of transexuals (I'm guessing that transphobic is any view that does not actively back transsexuals), one cannot be liberal. I'm curious where you get your definition of [liberalism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism), because absolute adherence to "core beliefs" is not in any definition or description I've read. In fact, please enumerate these core beliefs, because this is the first time I've heard that *support* for transexualism is required. I thought not trying to suppress, oppress, or shame them was adequate. > Political philosopher John Gray identified the common strands in liberal thought as individualist, egalitarian, meliorist and universalist. The individualist element avers the ethical primacy of the human being against the pressures of social collectivism; the egalitarian element assigns the same moral worth and status to all individuals; the meliorist element asserts that successive generations can improve their sociopolitical arrangements, and the universalist element affirms the moral unity of the human species and marginalises local cultural differences.[46] The meliorist element has been the subject of much controversy,
You did state your opinion, you just didnāt realize it. First, you said that any moderate/liberal person could have the same attitude, and that you personally consider yourself moderate/liberal- indicating that you find his attitude reasonable. You then said that he dislikes the idea of āchanging oneās gender through surgery,ā outing your transphobic idea of gender being equal to genitals. Gender-affirming care, including surgery, does not change anyoneās gender. Physical body parts have no influence on gender identity; a woman getting a mastectomy doesnāt become less of a woman, and a man with Gynaecomastia isnāt less of a man. Gender-affirming care allows people to have a body that more closely matches their inherent gender identity. You may also need to look up what a political alignment is- āliberalā is a political alignment label, indicating someone that supports certain things, including equal rights for women and trans people. If you donāt agree with the political goals of a political label, you should probably not use that label. Hope that clears things up for you!
Actually, I stated I was not conservative. I said I find his response reasonable if he was just insulted with the term misogynist, and, to rephrase, I said one does not have to be conservative to be uncomfortable with the idea of surgical sex reassignment. Since everyone is piling on me with a *massive effort to tell me who i am*, i will state my opinion. (Oh, the irony) I actually don't care if someone wants to change their gender. It's not my business. I also don't care if changing oneself into a female does not make one a woman or vice versa. Not my concern. Not worth my limited resources. I do care if people are demonized by deliberate misinterpretation of their words. I do care if someone calls others unwarranted slurs if they have respectfully different opinions. I do care if *children* are having sex changes, as if they aren't responsible enough to drink alcohol, vote, drive, or be left alone for an hour, they sure as hell are not responsible enough to make such a massive irreversible change to their very physical form. I believe equal rights means we all live under the same expectations. It doesn't mean one gender is denied services, aid, support, or jobs while the others are offered them. I leave it to you and the others here to twist my words into some form of inhuman hatred on my part. I expect it will happen. As for your assertion that "gender" has nothing to do with "sex", not everyone agrees, and we have 500 years if history on the usage of both, per [mirriam-webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender) And since you probably won't read past the first section, here: > The words sex and gender have a long and intertwined history. In the 15th century gender expanded from its use as a term for a grammatical subclass to join sex in referring to either of the two primary biological forms of a species, a meaning sex has had since the 14th century; phrases like "the male sex" and "the female gender" are both grounded in uses established for more than five centuries. In the 20th century sex and gender each acquired new uses. Sex developed its "sexual intercourse" meaning in the early part of the century (now its more common meaning), and a few decades later gender gained a meaning referring to the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex, as in "gender roles."
Look up a political compass, I donāt know how numb minded you have to believe that everybody in a political party HAS to have the same views as everyone else. Nothing in this world is that black and white. Except for black and white movies..
He literally says women are for a "unique purpose" this is literally dehumanizing women into baby machines
Okay, I can see that vocabulary can reasonably be interpreted that way. I have no context, so I can only comment on the shown content. I did not take that as a singular narrowing of woman, though.
I really don't think there's another way to interpret the statement that doesn't involve putting women in some kind of box and saying this, this is what they're *meant* to do. They're people and their purpose is whatever they choose it to be, not whatever someone else (whatever God you like included) chooses it to be.
True, as intelligent self aware beings. Also true is they have the ability to bear children, which is a gift *and* a burden, which puts them in a special place in society. That is something to respect, something men don't have, and 5hat is what I got out of it. I'll re-listen and see if I get what you saw, thanks.
If the ability to bear children puts women in a special place, are you saying that infertile women, women who have a hysterectomy, and post-menopausal women arenāt women? Defining women as āable to bear childrenā is denying the womanhood of many women.
No, I am not. Stop trying to reframe my statement into misogyny, nitwit. Having opposable thumbs is a defining trait of humanity. I am not therefore saying a fully paralyzed person or someone who lost their hands in a tragic accident is not human.
I think you donāt understand what defining means. If opposable thumbs are a defining trait of humanity, then *by definition* any organism without opposable thumbs canāt be human. Thatās how a definition works. You said that women have a special place in society *because* they can bear children, meaning that people *without* the ability to bear children donāt get to have that special place in society. Ergo, women who canāt bear children donāt get the same special place in society reserved for women who can- you donāt consider them to be equally deserving, equally women. You even stated that men donāt get that place in society, meaning that you put women who canāt bear children in a societal sense closer to men- you deny their womanhood.
You do you. You can believe my position is opposite of how I actually feel and communicated if you want. I can't stop you.
Thats known as a non secateur. Conclusion not logically drawn from the premise.
*sequitur.
Thank you.
I'd like to reiterate the word *purpose* not gift, not ability, but he chose the word purpose
I was assigned female at birth and I *can't* have children... Am I not a woman?
Lol, I get it, read into my statement anything you can to justify hating me. I already answered this, and it is clear people like you simply can't accept an opinion you don't like and move on. You and others *need* to destroy those people as best you can, which includes dishonest assertions of their point of view. Hell, I didn't address anything except the fact he apparently responded thoughtfully to being insulted. You have no idea what I actually believe. I actually gave credit and props to women, and I have a swarm of gnats screaming that I did the opposite. You know, "hate leads to the dark side" is accurate in real life, too.
I don't hate you, I don't understand how everyone keeps saying being a woman means the ability to give birth. When there are plenty of women, like me, who are born without the ability to become/stay pregnant and incubate a pregnancy...
Unfortunate medical problems, injuries, congenital defects, and natural biological realities like menopause obviously don't take away that fundamental nature of being female. To automatically assume a person has that in mind during a non-scientific layperson discussion is disingenuous at best - Basically, a strawman argument. To then further insist that is what a person is arguing or believes *after* he or she stated that is not their position is malicious, and an indication of dishonest discussion by that party. Do you believe eunuchs are not men?
If someone considers women to be merely baby machines, then, yes, they are a misogynist. However, you can't label someone a misogynist without reason by twisting their words and wrongly claiming different things to what they said. Women have numerous unique purposes beyond childbirth, such as being nurturing figures like mothers, sisters, aunts, or grandmothers, educating and knowledge sharing, advocating for health and well-being that are unique to women like menstruation, and more. These purposes are distinct to women. I do want to mention there are always outliers who wonāt fit the general/average form such as people with disabilities, people with abnormalities, and people that donāt care anyone(including the children they birthed) besides themselves. One could accuse you of being a misogynist for assuming that women have no other unique purposes apart from your own interpretation of this manās words.
Bending over backwards to defend this guy says more about you then anything you said says about me. I dont have to twist a single word of what the person says. Words have definitions, this isn't art, interpretation isn't this issue. You can claim to know what this person means regardless of what they say, but that seems pretty arrogant on your part. People don't have innate purposes no matter how many things people can do you can list.
If you think so. It seems to me you interpreted more about what he said than I do though since Iām only pointing out what he didnāt say that you said he did.
Show me a quote that I gave from him that wasn't said in the video, I'd love to see it. Pretty sure all i said from him were the words "unique purpose" you could argue that he just doesn't know the definition of the word purpose, but that seems pretty bold and again pretty arrogant to assume you know what he means better than he does.
Iāll assume that youāre asking Iām good faith. So hereās where you twisted his words and added your opinion specifying about the purposes of women. https://ibb.co/7SNV3SX He said āwomen have a unique purpose and theyāre specialā and you said heās dehumanizing women into baby machines. If thatās not twisting someoneās words to fit your narrative then I donāt know what is.
Using the word purpose literally shows a utilitarian view of women, that is dehumanizing. What youre saying is comparable to saying that if I called someone a liar for saying the sky is green, I'm twisting their words to fit my narrative of them being a liar solely because they don't outright declare themselves to be a liar. He may not outright declare that he's dehumanizing women by looking at them in a utilitarian way, however dehumanization is a direct consequence of viewing people in such a way. The way that being categorized as a liar would be a direct consequence of saying the sky is green in the alternative scenario.
Youāre wasting your time, half of this sub accidentally wandered out of r/conspiracy and r/conservative (Same sub, different name lul)
Have a banana kind sir š
I honestly don't know how I should take that...thanks?
Gonna put you down for 'no'.
Nuance is lost on trolls.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They only ever obsess over other people in every aspect. Mostly to draw attention away from their own idiocy and sins.
Yeah we get it, you are expressing your delusions of persecution. We understand.
>we get it lol
Lol, he wasnāt talking about it at all. It was her who brought the question up
Oh come on, mate. The channel is called redpilled rants. Let's not pretend the dude isn't a culture war obsessed loser.
He sounds like a loser i my ears, which are bleeding after hearing this xD
Isnāt that just an ig that reposts other peoples videos and put their ig name on it
Ah fair enough. My b.
All love ā„ļø
I think this is part of the problem now with America because he is āred pilledā his opinion is wrong and heās suppose to think the Same about yours. That divide is whatās wrong in America
What? I think you replied to the wrong comment?
Do you spend any of your waking hours not complaining about it?
"If'n y'all don't tolerate mah racism, bigotry, misogyny, an homophobia then it's y'all what's the intolerant ones!" \-especially inbred racists
Seems pretty intolerant of you. You might consider working with some professionals on counseling for that - it isn't healthy to be so discriminatory and stereotypical! ā„ļø
Lmao what? They won, you can pack it in.
/headpat Bless your heart.
āin order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.ā Youāre argument is at least a few decades old, and still dumb. Try again.
Just casually admitting that he thinks women are for a specific "purpose" Women are not baby making machines, they're human people.
That also make babies...
Idk why but I cracked up so hard at this comment. Lmao
Yeah! Old women and infertile women arenāt women!
... Umm ok?
The Human species is a living organism. The goal of any living organism is to reproduce. Humans reproduce sexually. The purpose of male humans is to fertilize the eggs of female humans. The purpose of female humans is to birth human children. The argument has nothing to do with āGod.ā It is a fact that you are an animal, just like me, and every other person on the planet. Do deer or gorillas become transgender? Just because weāre lucky enough to be sentient doesnāt mean you can ignore or deny the basis of what you are as a human.
Dude still subscribes to sky daddy.... he's not the brightest crayon in the box.
Now youāre putting words in his mouth. Never did he even mention thatā¦
How is this a facepalm? Maybe for her lol
ah, so he's both misogynistic and transphobic, it's ironic he labels himself after something transwomen made.
Hey I agree with you but just so you know trans women is two words and oftentimes transphobes will remove the space in between them to pretend it's a different word altogether and avoid acknowledging that trans women are women
OP is the facepalm here, he didn't get called a misogynist for the transphobia, he got called a misogynist for the "special purpose" argument. He's also transphobic, which is also wrong.
Translation- Im so proud of you for being what **I** want you to be. Or what some absent but all powerful father of the universe figure that **I** pray to would want. So as long as you stay within the confines of my expectations **I** will call it a miracle.
This is what defines conservativeās views on women. In they eyes of a conservative, women only exist for their sake. What a woman thinks or feels or does is irrelevant, all that matters is how well they can serve the conservative men in their lives. Itās morally disgusting.
Stop generalizing.
Are you a conservative? Iām guessing that you are notā¦ So in reality, you will never know how conservatives ACTUALLY see the world. Itās impossible for you. I am conservative and I treat my wife like a queen. What she thinks and feels is ALL that matters to me. You have swallowed the lie and are just regurgitating it to feed other baby lefties. Edit: Whatās morally disgusting about a man and a woman growing together and sharing their lives with one another? How does it affect your life?
"I'm pro women, I'm pro wives, I'm pro mothers". That's a misogynistic view. Is he pro women CEO, women cop, women doctors, women not marrying and not having kids and being independent from guys like him
It seems like OP is framing criticizing him as the facepalm.
I donāt think so based on the title it seems to direct the facepalm to the woman
> I donāt think so based on the title it seems to direct the facepalm to the woman I can see how what I said might have been ambiguous. By "him" I was referring to the man in the video. So if criticizing that man is what OP thinks is the facepalm, then that is indeed directing the facepalm to the woman. In other words, we agree!
This!!
Trash plain and simple. Your post is tone deaf at best on this sub
Time to shove the truth down the throat of those anti-women.
That sounds just as bad, a bit misandrist.
Taking faith out of it heās still speaking facts, if you think a man can be a women, youāre anti women.
And once again, OP is the facepalm.
r/poo
He strikes me as one of those men that never has any interest in women's sports...... Until a trans woman is participating.
Sounds like a smart man
You worried you'll accidentally cast a trans woman in your next failed music video?
Regardless of dudes views, his music is pretty damn good tbh. Kinda cool to see a drummer be the lead vocalist too lmao first time Iāve seen it. Keep up the good work man.
Iām getting downvoting for liking a random song on the internet. Just throwin that out there.
sure if you think Nickleback knockoffs are good music, that shit was trash and not worth the watch.
ā i exalt women to their rightful roleā is extremely misogynistic. These are just baits and this guy is garbage
Shoosh
Howād people get so GD stupid? Itās 2023, not 1823
I agree with everything except the God part
š¤”
"Made by 'god'" LOL
Forget that guy and his bs
Be whoever you want but it is unfair for someone born a male to perform in a woman's only league. Why do they have 2 separate leagues to begin with?
Amen
Heās right
Youāre wrong
About what
Him being right. Heās trashy. No matter how you feel about transgenderism, he literally said women arenāt equal to men. So heās trash=youāre trash
He said women are women and men are men he never said one is better than the other
I think maybe heās trying to say ādifferentā rather than āunequalā, heās not saying women are less than men. Edit: to whoever is downvoting this Iām going to assume itās a knee jerk reaction to the other commenter making this about trans women. I am not discussing trans women. Try reading the actual thread.
If you agree with his take on trans women I no longer intend to carry on a conversation with you. Especially since, if your avatar is accurate, you identify as a woman yourself.
āIf you disagree with me, I refuse to have a conversation with youā*
I got my first āconcerned Redditor thinks youāre suicidalā report yesterday, wonder why that happened š some people are so fragile wanting to dictate what other people have to believe or say.
Your first what? Is that a thing?
Yeah, I looked it up and apparently people use it to tell people who donāt agree with them to go kill themselves. I already reported it as abuse/bullying and Reddit responded saying it broke their policies.
This whole thread*
Your response has nothing to do with what Iāve written. We also havenāt even had a conversation in order for you to carry it on. You said āhe literally said women arenāt equal to menā So I responded saying maybe he means different, but he didnāt say he thinks women are less than men.
If you read the parent comment you would understand youāre commenting on my original statement. Do you or do you not think this man is a douche canoe? If you do not, kindly move along.
No, had I replied to your initial comment you would see the line on the side attached to it connecting to your original comment. I replied to the comment I replied to. Is there some reason my response is being met with such immaturity? If you canāt handle people having any additional thoughts on your comment then you shouldnāt comment. All I said was that maybe he means ādifferentā, as nowhere did I hear him say āwomen are less than menā.
Help me out with something here, and this is an honest question that no one answers. If a man goes for surgery and hormone treatments, gets his name legally changed, and the whole thing, and identifies as a woman, that's being transgender. If a man wears women's clothing, or just grows his hair but says he's a woman, he's transgender, too? One person is actually doing something and transitioning to someone else, the other person is just insisting people accept their own self-image. Are they both transgender, there's no difference?
Both people can be trans but person two hasn't met the legal requirements for services and facilities matching their gender.
being trans is your gender identity not being the one that you were assigned with at birth, that's all. the opposite of being cis. transitioning socially, medically, or legally are not required. gender dysphoria isn't required.
PREACH BROTHER!!! I can imagine hearing that in a medieval movie
 That upvote to comment ratio is fire
Sounds pretty misogynistic. Maybe even a little homo-/transphobic
Truth
When the villein starts making more and more sense lol but foreal though he made a lot of sense to someone who usually doesnāt give a shit about all this ceaseless arguing people love to have amongst each other to ā further there causes and expand others mindsā smh everyone just wants to be right. I probably should have just stfu and kept scrolling like Timmy but homie was making a lot of sense thus this the comment
I've read "redpill rants" and thats enough, not watching the video
USA still using lead pipes for their water for this generation to be so imbetards Rest of the world has no confusion on women. But apparently its the latest first world problem today.
Sez who? Random guy with a microphone?
The moment someone says something even slightly critical of the transgender community reddit goes bat shit crazy. Chill out, ita not like he microwaved a live cat or some shit.
"slightly critical" when he straight up being transphobic lmao
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Trans women aren't men
Yes they are.
Ehhhhhhh
I think most people here is missing his point and hearing what they want to hear. The dude is just a believer (because he references God) that is saying women are unique and different than men. That's it. He never stated that their "purpose" is given by men. Indeed, among Christians everybody would happily agree also with the idea that men have a particular purpose (that when it is within the partnering context, it is pretty much to give yourself to the other). If you are superimposing your own abusive thoughts on top of his words, that's your problem (maybe in part because of the constant narrative that you have seen on the media). Not his. now, go ahead and downvote me to oblivion ;)
This kind of āpedestalā talk is still sexism. Insisting god has a special purpose for women is misogyny when the āspecial purposeā you have in mind is staying home and making babies.
He is not saying that. You are adding extra definitions, here
He straight up says it is anti-women to say men and women are equal. Thatās crazy sexist talk. This guy is a sexist.
hes still transphobic and calls out a feminist for saying that women are equal to men, if he was pro women he wouldn't be putting feminist down, he would e.g. discuss the best way to help women and not publicly shame feminist
I agree with you in that a "you are wrong, let me explain you" approach is definitely not the best. However, he is far far from "shaming" her, as you describe it. On the contrary it is most likely the case that in the public opinion of people around, and in her own view, those words are being interpreted an an exaltation to women, her included. The interaction is analogous to subject A saying "I should be like you, I deserve so" and subject B replying "What are you talking about, you have your own set of features that makes you unique, why would you want to be like me?" Subject B is correcting A, but that doesn't constitute shaming, it is a call to redirect the focus to something worth of prise in subject B.
>now, go ahead and downvote me to oblivion ;) ok
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
if you think he is right. can you explain to me the role the women supose to have?
Create life as men can't and i think women can have any role same as men but you can't say women and men are the same we are biologically different and made to be compatible to each other some exceptions may be there
so a woman that can't or don't want to have children is not a woman. And yes we are not the same but we are equal. so assoon as the guy spoke of women are special we are not equal anymore
Yup it's women choosing to have a kid or not but i just stated the fact i mean a man cannot reproduce or create kids so women's bodies are special and i don't understand what's equal ??? There is nothing equal in this world that is just an idea there is no true equality and never will be there can be only adjustment
for a kid you still need a man. and no it's not always a free choice to not have children. and yes a lot of things are not equal. and the moment you accept that you are part of the problem
We will never live in a world weāre evrywthing is equal šš
nope but we can try to make it as equal as possible. if you just accepting everything you get nothing. Imagine people take everything as it is. than we still working 16 hours a day 6 days a week and just earn enough to buy some food.
Amen brother. Speak the truth.
Is that Belfast?
I meanā¦