It is you who is arguing irrationally & nonsensically. You fail to consider any of the rational arguments PITT makes, but only spew out your narrow-minded views, which are most likely a product of long-term brainwashing, & making baseless judgments & accusations.
So if you believe that no study can be trusted, that all evidence based on empirical data regarding trans people is fake, then how How do you determine what information to trust?
What would it take for you to reconsider your position?
"These are pumped out and funded by nefarious, bullshit people, activists, and institutions that are ideologically captured/funded that have an interest in pushing this fraud (by the Pritzkers, Rothblatt, Gill, Stryker)."
This is an extraordinary claim, and requires evidence to support it.
You are not great at this are you? Let me point out the following:
- Ad hominem: Attacking the intelligence and knowledge of those who disagree with you ("you are not smart enough") rather than addressing their arguments.
- Begging the question: Assuming your conclusion ("'Trans' is a media/medical industry construct") in your premises without providing evidence.
- False cause: Implying a connection between transgender rights and transhumanism without establishing a logical link.
- Appeal to authority: Relying heavily on a single author's work (Jennifer Bilek) without considering the broader scientific consensus.
- Hasty generalization: Making broad claims about the origins and nature of transgender identities based on limited sources.
- Poisoning the well: Preemptively discrediting potential counterarguments by labeling them as coming from "ignorant and brainwashed" sources.
Your misrepresentations include:
- Characterizing transgender rights as a "cult," which misrepresents the nature of gender identity and the scientific understanding of it.
- Implying that all support for transgender rights comes from "billionaires" and the medical industry, ignoring the lived experiences of transgender individuals and the work of numerous researchers and healthcare professionals.
- Suggesting that those who support transgender rights must have personal guilt or involvement, which is an unfounded assumption.
Your insistence on specific questions being answered ignores the complexity of gender identity and the nuanced scientific understanding of it. A productive discussion on this topic requires engaging with peer-reviewed research and established medical consensus, rather than relying on conspiracy theories or single-source claims.
![People with Inconvenient Truths about Transphobes [PITT]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_80,h_80,c_fill,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep,g_auto/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F704ba0db-3e10-4112-9364-c2f224d0cfae_500x500.png)
Who hurt you, Kat? Are you ok?
It is you who is arguing irrationally & nonsensically. You fail to consider any of the rational arguments PITT makes, but only spew out your narrow-minded views, which are most likely a product of long-term brainwashing, & making baseless judgments & accusations.
This is not longer good faith engagement and is not escalated to trolling.
You need to cool your heels and head for a bit, maybe touch some grass.
Once you are out of time out, maybe you will feel like being more civil and rational. Enjoy your 24 hour break.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Argumentum_ad_nauseam
What is a rational argument? One based on facts, not feelings. One that cites sources, and has evidence to back up their claims.
You are the only one here who is not arguing rationally.
Proof or it is dismissed as made up as the tooth fairy.
So if you believe that no study can be trusted, that all evidence based on empirical data regarding trans people is fake, then how How do you determine what information to trust?
What would it take for you to reconsider your position?
"These are pumped out and funded by nefarious, bullshit people, activists, and institutions that are ideologically captured/funded that have an interest in pushing this fraud (by the Pritzkers, Rothblatt, Gill, Stryker)."
This is an extraordinary claim, and requires evidence to support it.
You are not great at this are you? Let me point out the following:
- Ad hominem: Attacking the intelligence and knowledge of those who disagree with you ("you are not smart enough") rather than addressing their arguments.
- Begging the question: Assuming your conclusion ("'Trans' is a media/medical industry construct") in your premises without providing evidence.
- False cause: Implying a connection between transgender rights and transhumanism without establishing a logical link.
- Appeal to authority: Relying heavily on a single author's work (Jennifer Bilek) without considering the broader scientific consensus.
- Hasty generalization: Making broad claims about the origins and nature of transgender identities based on limited sources.
- Poisoning the well: Preemptively discrediting potential counterarguments by labeling them as coming from "ignorant and brainwashed" sources.
Your misrepresentations include:
- Characterizing transgender rights as a "cult," which misrepresents the nature of gender identity and the scientific understanding of it.
- Implying that all support for transgender rights comes from "billionaires" and the medical industry, ignoring the lived experiences of transgender individuals and the work of numerous researchers and healthcare professionals.
- Suggesting that those who support transgender rights must have personal guilt or involvement, which is an unfounded assumption.
Your insistence on specific questions being answered ignores the complexity of gender identity and the nuanced scientific understanding of it. A productive discussion on this topic requires engaging with peer-reviewed research and established medical consensus, rather than relying on conspiracy theories or single-source claims.