You'll get called dramatic for saying that but Republicans are absolutely eyeing a form of trans genocide; removing access to treatment and creating as hostile and dangerous an environment possible for trans people. They want us to disappear.
100% trans genocide is the point.
I'm just some cis dude but I'm in your corner bro/sis/enby buddy ❤️
And my axe.
Thank you <3
It's infuriating and scary they way it feels most people miss that, I just want to live my life, maybe even love it. But with the billionaires on one hand and the bigots on the other it's really hard on so many levels. There's an element of fear and uncertainty in my home and I am sure in many others. The fear of self sustainability, looming threats of homelessness and poverty if there is anything to disrupt our productivity for the owning class along with making decisions based on when, not if, unjust laws are passed that threaten our very existence. Saving and moving house, trying to get to a point where we eventually live in a northern haven isn't a retirement prospect, a grasp for opportunity, or a change of scenery, it's a requirement to make sure we can continue the being alive part.
Sometimes it is hard when the future seems so bleak and I spend so much of my time barely keeping my head above water, having a seemingly lofty goal as a near necessity. This society is a fucking joke, but at least there are people, like you, in our corner. Hopefully in time things can unshittify but things are getting bad, fast, at the moment.
At the same time, I can't help but feel so incredibly lucky despite everything, There are people facing harsher systemic difficulties, less access to opportunity, and harsher local conditions. Despite everything I'm alive, I'm here now, and it makes me angry, and sad, that people like Nex are forced to end the fight so early due to heartless politicians and their base of vultures.
Sorry to trauma dump, it's been brutal lately.
it's been brutal lately
No disagreement here. I don't like that "savior" stereotype but IDK I hope it helps to see someone outside the affected groups just agree that yes, it is a load of hyper bullshit and no you're not fucking crazy.
Y'all keep fighting, and I'll keep getting in trouble in my Bible belt dive bars for telling people they can eat my whole ass for saying dumbass shit.
You aren't being dramatic as long as there are shamans all minorities are targets. We know exactly what Abrahamic theocracies are like.
Owasso PD spokesperson Nick Boatman told The Independent that police were awaiting the results of toxicology and autopsy reports from the Oklahoma Medical Examiner’s Office before determining whether anyone will be charged.
Ofc cops want a toxicology report on the victim instead of testing the perpetrators.
ACAB
To be fair, according to the article, the victim collapsed and stopped breathing the day after the altercation, probably leading them to believe they might have taken some substance subs then that could've caused this.
I don't think it's unreasonable to do a toxicology test.
Testing the other kids for what? An overdose of "fight in the girls bathroom" meds? Make some sense.
Yes, that's kind of how an investigation works you dingbat.
If you left out calling them a dingbat your point is exactly the same.
Transphobic shit bags are seeking out stories about Nex and seeing what they can get away with because they know it's a really good opportunity for them to grind salt into some peoples' wounds
Once again. Calling people names didn't reinforce your point. It usually does the opposite. Your anger doesn't make your point more poignant.
I'm not saying anything other that calling people names doesn't accomplish anything. I have zero contempt for anyone holding anyone back from who they are. I am literally not on any side and simply pointing out that calling people names does not seem mature and puts people off. If you can't handle that feedback that is your problem.
Not really, but do go on with your transphobic remarks.
Can you point out what that person said that was transphobic? From the reply it just seems like that they were pointing out that a toxicology report is something that's fairly routine. What did I miss?
It's pretty common to see transphobes wading into this sort of stuff with the same kind of arguments that racists use about police murdering black people, etc. That support of the system because the system is oppressing a minority they don't like kind of thing where they turn a blind eye to any context.
I'm not gonna wade into that kind of debate, but to me, the big issue is what I saw somebody else say: that the police aren't even going to consider whether or not a crime was committed until after they get the toxicology report, despite knowing that the person in question was assaulted like the day before.
Like the cops, focusing on the toxicology report alone is an easy way to erase everything else about what happened. Having a toxicology done isn't transphobic, but focusing only on that and when it comes back clean, ruling it as a freak accident and not following up on the assault? That would be transphobic as hell and wouldn't be the first or last time the cops did something like that.
Here's my issue, when you call someone a transphobe (or racist, or pedophile, etc) when they haven't actually been transphobic, you water down the meaning. It just becomes a thing you say that lost it's meaning, rather than the big deal it is.
that the police aren't even going to consider whether or not a crime was committed until after they get the toxicology report, despite knowing that the person in question was assaulted like the day before.
Why would they before they finish investigating? What's the charge? Simple assault, assault and battery, manslaughter, negligent homicide, second degree murder? If you don't have all the facts you can't charge them properly.
Maybe the police have an interest in burying the charges, but if you don't know that, you shouldn't claim it. Because the best way to secure a conviction is to thoroughly investigate first, then bring charges once the information has been gathered. Anything else is laying the groundwork for a defense attorney.
Like the cops, focusing on the toxicology report alone is an easy way to erase everything else about what happened. Having a toxicology done isn't transphobic, but focusing only on that and when it comes back clean, ruling it as a freak accident and not following up on the assault? That would be transphobic as hell
Ok, agreed. But that hasn't happened yet. Reacting to something that hasn't happened just allows other people to ignore you and your concerns about trans rights. I would caution against that approach. If they don't take action once the info is in, or blame the victim, then you get mad as hell. Best of luck!
Yeah, when I said that I wasn't gonna wade into the argument, I meant on whether or not they were actually being transphobic, because that one line simply isn't enough to say what their motivation is.
As for the cops, the issue is that they're doing a toxicology, but not following up on the assault in any form. They could be investigating that as well while they wait on the report, but they're actively holding off on doing that.
The included insult, however mild, must be seen as an attempt to denigrate QUESTIONING the police methods, as if the environment was "obviously" fair and balanced. He might have not meant it that way, but even then it's an example of the moderate being the true enemy of the oppressed. So it's either a tactic, siding with a fascist system or at best inconsiderate.
The included insult, however mild, must be seen as an attempt to denigrate QUESTIONING the police
No it doesn't. That's ridiculous to insist it must be viewed in that manner. That's your reductionist view.
He might have not meant it that way,
So he may not have meant it that way, but we must view it that way? Absolutely insane take.
but even then it's an example of the moderate being the true enemy of the oppressed. So it's either a tactic, siding with a fascist system or at best inconsiderate.
Here's the real issue, you've created a litmus test that no one is pure enough to meet. Rather than accepting allies for trans rights, you want to push them away. If they aren't as reactionary and reductionist as you then they must be the enemy. Truly alarming. You're the problem, you allow the "moderates" (as you call them), who might otherwise support trans rights to oppose them by pushing them out and calling them transphobic.
I'm not calling anybody anything, I'm criticizing a behavior. And someone called the comment transphobic, not the poster.
So he may not have meant it that way, but we must view it that way? Absolutely insane take.
It's about how fascist strategy works. And part of that is an appeal to order for the moderates. This book (excepts) talks a lot about this stuff.
This is a life-or-death fight against fascism. Literally in this case. But the fascists won't stop with trans people.
There is a very clear fascist movement that is rapidly growing in strength in the US. First the rhetoric, the attacks on teachers, the bullying, then physical violence, the maliciousness or incompetence of the school, now a 16 year old kid is dead. Then the police are waiting and then say her sudden death had nothing to do with the attack.
Maybe the police is right? Or maybe they are biased or maybe they are fascist?
Reading all this makes people sad and angry they criticizes the police.
Now someone calls him a dingbat for jumping to conclusions.
His remarks (not the person) are being called out as transphobic.
And THAT enrages you THAT creates this outrage in you of how awful it is to get angry at people who push back against outrage at the police. Not the death, not the police makes you angry, but this incredibly injustice! This is what you chose to make comments about.
It's the presumption that the police system works as intended and should work like this and shouldn't be criticized. Coupled with an insult. It's outrageous. I'm not calling it transphobic, I'm calling it the "negative peace" that moderates prefer (see MLK about white moderates) and works in support of fascism.
When did 'dingbat' become transphobic?
Has 'dingbat' become a new epithet for trans people?
Because it apparently originally was the name of an alcoholic drink and has been used to describe a stupid person since 1905.
If it's in Clifton, those guys support white power bands 😕
It is... oh boy. I have only been twice since my friend has a metal band that plays there sometimes. I never knew and I doubt he knows that as well since he is definitely not into that either.
Yeah, it's definitely not as widely-known a thing as it should be. Plenty of perfectly respectable bands play there too, still... but also some Nazis
What part of what they said is transphobic?
OH NOW YOU TOO HUH
/s
It’s funny, because I literally just left a thread in which I was agreeing with them and then I saw the notification of your comment.
Impressive amount of downvotes. Troll successful, I guess
THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE TO ARM UP AND BE SEEN READY TO FIGHT
These people know you're a doormat and a pushover.
I have to admit, one of my first emotional responses was anger. I want vengeance. When will we see the day the bullies, abusers, murderers, and their enablers receive justice?
Not civilized "justice" in court rooms, on pieces of paper, with well-dressed men and women arguing politely over legal arcana.
Blood for blood. There should be a mortal fear that if they harm one hair on our heads, something worse will happen to them by far.
Don't tell me this won't bring anyone back. Don't tell me to be better than our enemies. If you will assault someone over their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, you don't deserve the breath of life.
The problem with mob justice is lack of due process. It frequency gets the wrong person as it can't be reasoned with.
The problem with mob justice is that it can be leveraged directly in to fascism. This is exactly what happened with the French Revolution and the Soviet one. In both cases valid anger against oppression was directed in to paranoia that allowed for the reestablishment of an authoritarian order instead of liberation. Anger is foolish and easily manipulated. That's why it's the only emotion the right wants anyone to experience. That's why it's the only emotion patriarchy allows men to express.
Anger is good for destroying things. Some things need to be destroyed. But those things that need to be destroyed are systems, not people.
Anger is activating and should absolutely drive you to action, but the action you take shouldn't also be decided by the anger. Let anger wake you up, and compassion guide the action you take.
History repeats itself, at least most of the time. That's why we should learn from the past because humans haven't changed that much in the way we think under certain circumstances.
No, I'm sorry, if a person was bullied for a year, that was the time for "due process" to protect them and society by preventing further harm. Now it is too late.
They caused someone to die by their violent actions, I am fully in favor of violent retaliation here, and as I said not looking to be convinced otherwise.
There are some things our society gets right, and some things it gets wrong. Passivity in the face of violence is a mistake IMO.
It's never too late for justice to be done. Though more of it has to done the later it is left. No one is talking passivity here. Everyone wants something done this time and done sooner next time.
Mob justice is not justice at all.
Edit: english
Yes it is
Anarchy doesn't work.
Anarchy was never mentioned.
That is mob rule. It's not the rule of law.
That is not what mob rule is, and this literally has nothing to do with government
Mob rule is the breakdown of law and order. Which a failing of governance.
You mean like we have now with psychotic and treasonous christofascists trying to destroy freedom while you complain about "law and order"?
Yeah, and if you remove justice by due process by installing fascist bigots in all positions of the judicial system, then all you're left with is mob justice. And we ought to be angry about that too.
It's a social contract thing. Conservatives insist on being granted all of the benefits you get by signing an accord with the rest of us, but then act as though they are exempt from it's requirements.
As far as I'm concerned, they aren't covered by the agreement anymore, and should be deprived of any protection offered by it.
This isn't "Christianity". And that's not to defend the religion, but it is just one head of this Hydra, not the core of the problem. People in power are using hate and fear in whatever medium they can to consolidate and increase that power, casualties be damned.
They all just happen to be religious by coincidence.
They all just happen to be religious by coincidence.
Religion is the tool, not the motive.
There are those that practice their faith the way it should be practiced, without causing harm to others.
And then there are others who want power, and will use the tool to manipulate others, to get that power.
But there's a reason why the tool is always religion
But there’s a reason why the tool is always religion
You'd be foolish to think that that is the only tool available for people to manipulate others with.
No one is saying that it is.
No one is saying that it is.
I was responding to a comment from someone else, and not from you...
But there’s a reason why the tool is always religion
If it's always religion then it can't be anything else, right? So that person was indirectly stating that's the only tool, and I was pointing out that there's multiple ways of manipulating others, besides religion.
There are those that practice their faith the way it should be practiced, without causing harm to others.
Tell me the Bible passage that says that.
There are those that practice their faith the way it should be practiced, without causing harm to others.
Tell me the Bible passage that says that.
Because people are just their books, and have no free will of their own.
You point to me in the New Testament where Jesus himself advocates violence and harm to innocents, and then we can have a conversation.
Because people are just their books, and have no free will of their own.
Very well. In that case I want a citation. How did you determine the "right" way and why is everyone else wrong?
You point to me in the New Testament where Jesus himself advocates violence and harm, and then we can have a conversation.
I already did this in this thread. Come on some level of effort on your point. He does it repeatedly! He talks about how he will be the future king and his enemies will be butchered then sent to hell. He makes a woman beg at his feet while calling herself a racial slur before he helps her kid. He rebukes a man with leprosy for having leprosy. He tells people to give up all means of support and their own families just to follow him.
Very well. In that case I want a citation. How did you determine the “right” way and why is everyone else wrong?
You're being intellectually dishonest to suggest that I'm saying everyone else is wrong, as the point I'm trying to make is not that at all, that you can't judge a whole people based on what their religion is, as people have free will and follow there religion to their modern worldview, and see what are you with me not just what ancient text stated verbaten.
As far as how I determine what the right way is, I do it via The Golden Rule. Do onto to others, as you would have others do unto you. Basically, what Jesus taught at a summary level. Be kind of others, don't harm them help where you can, etc.
And for the record, I'm not a Christian, just in case you think you're arguing against one.
I would love to have a Christian scholar review what you're saying, especially the quotes that you're stating are coming from Jesus, for factuality.
As far as how I determine what the right way is, I do it via The Golden Rule. Do onto to others, as you would have others do unto you.
And the classic justification is torturing/murdering people was needed to save their souls which is what you would want.
Basically, what Jesus taught at a summary level. Be kind of others, don’t harm them help where you can, etc.
He didn't teach that. He didn't exist. The idea predates the Bible by over five centuries in India, via trade routes and scholar migration it entered into that part of the world. It seems to have entered into Judaism about 50 or so BCE where it was attributed to Rabbi Hillel who has some superficial resemblance to the Jesus of Matthew.
And for the record, I’m not a Christian, just in case you think you’re arguing against one.
Very well. Would you mind commiting blasphemy against the Holy Ghost for me? A non-christian should have no problem with the unforgivable sin of Christianity.
I would love to have a Christian scholar review what you’re saying, especially the quotes that you’re stating are coming from Jesus, for factuality.
The Bible is freely available online. Do your own work.
As far as how I determine what the right way is, I do it via The Golden Rule. Do onto to others, as you would have others do unto you.
How the fuck do you get from what was said above to what is said down below?...
And the classic justification is torturing/murdering people was needed to save their souls which is what you would want.
Because I want others to murder me right. Jesus Christ.
Okay dude, I tried, honestly, but I'm blocking you. You're literally the first person I've ever blocked on Lemmy, but you're just not worth talking to.
How the fuck do you get from what was said above to what is said down below?..
Not my logic. I am pointing out the train of thought coming from St. Augustine in City of God onward. It is better to kill a hertic and give them a chance at heaven vs letting them live and they get no chance. If you don't like that logic please invent a time machine and stop the witching burnings plus all the other awful stuff Christians did.
Where did I say it wasn't part of the problem? I said the exact opposite, in fact.
This is exactly Christianity. Their book tells them to act this way and their shamans have been screaming for this conduct for twenty centuries. Every single Christian I have dealt with is about one bad day away from doing this and why shouldn't they? The have skydaddy telling them that they will be forgiven for everything and that it is a good thing to oppress the LGBT.
Again, I'm not defending the religion, just saying that blaming one thing here is missing the mountain of other contributing factors. If we erased christianity and every other religion you want gone from the world, the hate and fear would still be there, as would the people manipulating that to benefit themselves.
If cancer were cured tomorrow people would still die eventually, but I would rather live in a world without cancer than one with it.
Great metaphor, actually, since cancer is most often caused or exacerbated by something else. But you're still missing my point by a mile. Keeping going after the symptom rather than the sickness, I guess. I'm sure that'll solve everything.
I got your point. You refuse to address the issue and instead want us all to wander around in circles finding "deeper" reasons.
Swing and a miss again.
Nope.
I don't mean to be disrespectful to those who you are replying to, but are you sure those are even regular people you're talking to, and not bots?
Either they're very fanatical and can't see outside of their box, or they're being intellectually dishonest in how they respond to you, seeming to miss your point that's being expressed very well and straightforward.
Eh, I don't think so. People (understandably) hyper-focus on religion, and Christianity in particular, and the terrible things done under them, and it can be hard to get them to view the larger scope of the situation.
Fair enough, but they seem to be overly obtuse about it, to a fault.
Nope human. Got meat organs and everything. I love how the only defense of religion is to personally attack the guy calling out what it does
This is exactly Christianity. Their book tells them to act this way and their shamans have been screaming for this conduct for twenty centuries.
Granted, I missed Jesus's sermon on the hill, but I'm sure I would have heard something about him okaying bullying and killing good people just because they're different.
Christian fundamentalists don't have nothing in common with Jesus. They are fake christians. Jesus preached tolerance so many times. They fucking don't get it that they ignore him completely.
Christian fundamentalists don’t have nothing in common with Jesus. They are fake christians. Jesus preached tolerance so many times. They fucking don’t get it that they ignore him completely.
That's the point I've been trying to make. That when everyone says Christians are bad there's actually two types of Christians, the Jesus type, and the modern Christians who use the name but don't act like how Jesus would want them to.
Do the Jesus types live in Scotland with the True Scots?
You know I do find it kind of weird to bring up the no true scotsman fallacy in this shit, when the real point of that fallacy is just kind of to get people to be conscious that their mental definitions don't actually exist in reality, and they have to work from a formal definition, right? But I think, without getting into the specifics of like, that guy's biblical interpretation, it's pretty obvious that they have a definition of "christian" that doesn't line up with the others.
You might, instead of bringing up the scotsman fallacy, have better luck in hitting them with what the scotsman fallacy hearkens to, and asking them for a clear definition that you might then be able to push back on with counterexample.
Basically, I am accusing you of the fallacy fallacy.
Jesus didn't exist. The fictional person in the Gospels preached a doctrine that his was the only way to salvation and all other ways lead to hell. That one does not have the right to basic sexuality, property, and what they say.
That is not any form of tolerance I have ever heard of. One the rejects freedom of religion, expression, sexual preferences, and possessions. What possible tolerance could there be in a world where a shaman can order you to only worship him, to hand over all your stuff, to love only whom he approves of, and only say what he wants you to say?
Jesus didn’t exist.
Ballsy of you to say that. I'd like to know what proof you have of that.
Honestly not saying that you're wrong, but it's really tired of people who say things with such certainty when they're just pulling it out of one of their orifices.
The fictional person in the Gospels preached a doctrine that his was the only way to salvation and all other ways lead to hell. That one does not have the right to basic sexuality, property, and what they say.
[Citation Required.]
I’d like to know what proof you have of that.
Chiming in here to say that generally you need proof of positive claims in a debate, rather than proof of negative claims. Claiming dragons are real requires evidence, claiming that they are not real, well, I mean, first you'd have to establish a definition of what dragons are, but mostly, it wouldn't require evidence to claim they're not real, because proving such a thing would be a feat an order of magnitude greater than proving they exist.
In any case, have fun with your debate.
Well aware but thanks. I gave my evidence.
Chiming in here to say that generally you need proof of positive claims in a debate, rather than proof of negative claims.
I'm not asking him to prove a negative, I'm asking him to prove his firm assertion that Jesus did not exist.
My understanding is there's no conclusive evidence either way, so when somebody states either one of the extremes, that he absolutely existed, or he absolutely did not exist, I want to know where their proof is coming from that allows him to say such a thing with such certainty, because I know the evidence is inconclusive (at least at the last time I took a look into it).
In any case, have fun with your debate.
I've actually blocked him at this point, so there won't be any further debate. My first block on Lemmy actually, I try very hard never to do that.
Yeah I kinda brain farted on positive vs negative claims there, it always confuses me as to whether or not you can make a positive claim on a statement about how something doesn't exist, and it's more about, the most reasonable thing is to not really know for sure one way or another, and you're actually making the negative claim against certainty. I dunno, confuses me still. On the rank, it would still make more sense to argue for a lack of a thing than for existence of a thing, right? Sort of along the lines of the raven paradox?
and nah, I had to do that earlier to a dickhead I was arguing with, very obviously bad faith, only cherry picked specific pieces of my arguments, you know how it goes.
tried very hard not to as well, but damn, that motherfucker kinda pissed me off, ngl. I dunno. I find I have a much higher hit rate on this website than any other, in terms of positive engagements, right, but because of that, I would also engage with people more here than on other platforms, where I might instead put in much less effort. so it's sort of a double edged sword, because people can much more easily waste my time. I think I've just come to the conclusion that I'm writing for myself as a creative exercise, beholden to my own standards, more than I'm writing specifically for them, you know?
at least, that mentality helps me.
It's best not to overthink it, as it seems you are doing (no offense meant).
If someone says 'a' is true, you can ask them how do you know 'a' is true, and if they just say oh because I know, then you can push further because that's just a bullshit answer. Especially so if you take the comment in relation to the whole conversation you're having with them, and the level of intellectual honesty they have in conversing with you.
As far as conversations go here on Lemmy, I'm not finding good quality of conversation here on Lemmy at all, and I'm seriously considering leaving and going back to Reddit because of that, unfortunately.
From the quality of new posts people are making to the arguments that end up happening right away inside of each one of them, it actually seems a lot worse than it was on Reddit. Good to hear it's working out well for you though.
yeah, I've probably fried my brain thinking too hard about it fs, just in general.
A lot of it is up to figuring out who's going to be the best person to engage with, which I think is pretty easily done just by looking at post length. Longer posts require higher effort, = this person will be more likely to engage in good faith. Trolls tend to leave little quips, rather than large spiels.
Also, lemmy, just like reddit, also tends to be, if not an echo chamber, then certainly, a place where you can see who's popular, and who's unpopular. Who holds the most mainstream "lemmy" opinion. I think it's generally better a lot of the time to engage with people who get a lot of downvotes, but seem to be acting in good faith otherwise, cause they have interesting opinions, and I think interrogating them is a good way to help them build their case, when otherwise it would just kinda be left to shit a lot of the time. The exception are political posts where you're going to have to uproot someone's whole worldview in order to make them see the light.
Weirdly counterintuitive, right, because you would expect most people to be more combative after going through the ringer of downvote oblivion, but it has been my experience that if you show them a modicum of sympathy they will respond to you oftentimes much better than a more popularly opinioned user might. I don't really know why this is, maybe it's because people perceive themselves to have some amount of power, or maybe it's just because users are more likely to respond to, and upvote, short quips, as we've seen kind of infect reddit, and obviously those people are not worth bothering 90% of the time.
I dunno, that's the only thing that strikes me maybe about your post pattern in this thread specifically, to do a better psychic reading I'd have to look at your other posts and I'm too lazy to do that rn. Hope any of what I said helps, though.
Ballsy of you to say that. I’d like to know what proof you have of that.
Sure. Total lack of contemporary evidence, lack of all relics from his life, the inability of anyone to keep basic biographical details about his life straight, clear and obvious plagiarism from texts in wide circulation at the time, lack of a dynasty, and easier explanations for the scarce data that we have.
You could write Paul's letters completely from just being told 2 things about Jesus and being familiar with Jewish and Greek writings. You could write the entire gospel of Mark with the letters and again some familiarity with the writings of the time. Matthew adds almost nothing. Luke-Acts just adds stuff about Paul.
Want the Euchrist? Guess what eating your god was a common mystery cult practice. Want a dead leader? All over Judaism start with the Maccabees. Want the last supper? Common fiction trope at the time. Want the Tomb? Again already in fiction. Feeding the multitudes and healing the sick? Easy, Elijiah.
That one does not have the right to basic sexuality, property, and what they say.
Being serious? All that stuff about giving up your property to charity, ripping your eye out instead of looking with lust, condemning people for not saying that he was lord?
Being serious? All that stuff about giving up your property to charity, ripping your eye out instead of looking with lust, condemning people for not saying that he was lord?
Yeah, I really am, honestly.
As I mentioned to you somewhere, I'm not a Christian.
So if you actually got proof that Jesus is a bastard please do so. Be specific about it and don't just say something without any connotation about who's saying it or where it's cited from. Because from all the quotes you've been making I literally can't touch tell which one of those are from Jesus.
I already gave this to you
He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.
The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand,
Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.”’
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’
The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth
Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire
The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know and will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth
He is now the judge of a sinful world, and on His head is the crown of the sole ruler of earth. On His robe, dipped in blood, and on His thigh is written, “King of kings and Lord of lords,” and no one alive doesn’t tremble at the sight of Him.
This is all in there. NIV translation is what I used.
He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.
The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand,
Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.”’
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’
The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth
Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire
The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know and will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth
He is now the judge of a sinful world, and on His head is the crown of the sole ruler of earth. On His robe, dipped in blood, and on His thigh is written, “King of kings and Lord of lords,” and no one alive doesn’t tremble at the sight of Him.
You know, I've been noticing more and more that lemmy has a bunch of people who just fuckin hate religion straight up, edgy 2010's reddit atheism style. I don't necessarily disagree with a lot of their criticisms, but it has gotten kind of annoying seeing people attribute these clearly complex and incentive driven behaviors to something so broad, so old, and so vague.
It seems pretty obvious to me personally that conservatives have kind of given up on contesting civil rights and gay rights as a means to differentiate themselves from the other neoliberals, since those issues remain pretty deeply unpopular to contest, and are moving to this as sort of the next thing in their playbook, the next highest profile minority that they can easily lambast on nightly news. All while they try to roll back those other issues through every possible angle they might be able to work in local, state, and federal government.
That's even a pretty big oversimplification of the issue, and the different forces involved, right, like it's not really tied into why or how specifically they're doing that, right, but it's really stupid to even have that surface level understanding, and still bump up against people insisting that it's more singularly some other driving, evil force. As though you couldn't, were you to analyze christianity, split such a thing up into another whole litany of forces, another whole network of relations, causes and effects.
It says right in the Bible that being LGBT is a sin worthy of being sent to hell and that Jesus wants his enemies killed. Do you need me to quote chapter and verse?
Hey you know what? I fully admit I am an angry atheist. That means I say mean little things sometimes. You know what I don't do? I don't beat a trans kid to death inside a school bathroom, I don't commit war crimes, and I dont descrate cultural sites.
You really want to both sides this? You really want to compare a few mean little comments to beating a child to death?
Which Christianity? Jesus', or today's modern-day Evangelical?
The same Christianity that wiped out the pagan faiths of Europe via mass murder, led a series of bloody wars into the "Holy" Land, plunged the former empire into the dark ages, burned books and people, repeatedly murdered each other over doctrine and any minority they could grab, built instruments of torture to go after supposed heretics, and not content with the horrors they subjected parts of the Middle East and all of Europe to went forward and introduced their rot to the rest of the world.
That Christianity. The burning at the stake, stabbing homosexuals with fire pokers, the genocidal against the Jews, the rape and pillage of Arab lands, the Christianity that imprisoned and tortured any free thinker. The same one that even today is quickly working to "deal" with the Muslims and the trans.
And why shouldn't it be exactly like that? The whole thing is modeled after one of the most repulsive characters in all of fiction.
I'm talking about individuals. You're talking about institutions. An institution is not made of 100% of individuals that all think exactly the same.
Pat Robertson is an individual. Want to talk about him?
The same Christianity that wiped out the pagan faiths of Europe via mass murder, led a series of bloody wars into the “Holy” Land, plunged the former empire into the dark ages, burned books and people, repeatedly murdered each other over doctrine and any minority they could grab, built instruments of torture to go after supposed heretics, and not content with the horrors they subjected parts of the Middle East and all of Europe to went forward and introduced their rot to the rest of the world.
You keep being intellectually dishonest. The Crusades and the other things you described were not done by Jesus, they were done by other men centuries later.
There's a clear disembarkation in philosophy between what Jesus spoke of and taught, and what regular people throughout the ages interpreted what he said as, for their own personal benefits.
There’s a clear disembarkation in philosophy between what Jesus spoke of and taught, and what regular people throughout the ages interpreted what he said as, for their own personal benefits.
Nothing in the Bible doesn't align with the crusades
I can't imagine -- don't want to imagine losing a child. I had no idea until I had a kid but... Nothing in the universe matters more to me than my kid and I would be destroyed forever if anything ever happened.
To lose a kid (very likely) due to bullying? I can't imagine the blind rage mixed in with the universe shattering grief.
What sick fucked world do we live in where school bullying turns into violence that turns into death? Just for being different from most? Jesus Christ. These psychopaths should be in jail getting intensive therapy to try to unfuck their twisted minds.
This child could have lived a full life but instead because of fearful, hateful monsters, the kid is dead.
Fuck Oklahoma and fuck this school and the parents of the murderers.
It's only going to get worse if Trump gets back in power. As if it isn't bad enough now.
Boy, girl, non binary, whatever WHO GIVES A FUCKING SHIT?! Mind your own goddamn business and don't be a fucking evil piece of shit. Let people fucking exist as they are.
My biggest fear is to outlive my daughter. And since she's queer (not trans, but queer), I worry about her being assaulted or even killed because of it, especially as people like Trump foster bigotry. Also, one of her closest friends is trans and I'm very worried about him. I know he's being bullied in school and he already has self-harm issues. Thankfully, his parents support his transition, but he's still not getting the support he needs and the school makes him use the girls bathroom and locker room. I hope he makes it through school okay. He's only 12 and he's already cutting himself, vaping and smoking weed.
I hope he finds the strength to get through this. Besides support from his family and having supportive friends, which no one should take for granted, there's overcoming the bullying and finally, the hardest of all, the inner conflict. Topple this with puberty's own ordeal, so everything gets even more confusing. But it's also the one task, that drops the most loot, if you solve it. There's nothing more rewarding than feeling inner peace, love yourself and coming of age strong and prosperous.
I do too. So much. I wish I could do something to help him, but I've only met him one time. I know the school he's in is utter shit. We pulled my daughter out and put her in online school because of how much she was bullied. The administration actually made her apologize to her bullies after they doxxed her on Discord and prank called her repeatedly. Fuck that school. If I could get her friend to do online school with her, I'd drive him to my house every day just to keep him away from that shit. I really wish I could.
This would indeed be a solution, what's deterring him to take the chance?
Doing online school, you mean? I don't know his parents and I wouldn't know how to convince them.
Do you think you'd be able to talk to them about it? If his parents are supportive, maybe they'd be receptive to online school too.
I wouldn't even know how to get in touch with them. My daughter sure wouldn't give me the details. She's very closed about that sort of thing. I don't even know his last name.
Maybe she could float the idea to him then?
That really sucks.
Maybe make up a reason for a party and get your kid to invite her friends. March break is coming up.
This is one of several reasons why I'm (secularly) homeschooling my kids.
What sick fucked world do we live in where school bullying turns into violence that turns into death?
It probably happens more often than you think. Without the nonbinary angle and excuse to invoke bathroom bills this wouldn't have got nearly the attention that it did. In the US, most bullying related deaths are suicide and a couple hundred thousand kids get physically attacked by fellow students every year in addition (most recent number I'd found was a few years old and around 288k). If you piece together the various statistics, an estimate of around 3500 kids per year dying to bullying-related suicide is probably reasonable. Bullying-related homicide is harder to get a decent number on, but it's probably significantly lower.
That they can say the autopsy showed CoD was not trauma from the attack but were awaiting toxicology and other ancillary results before naming an official CoD makes me curious if they suspect CoD is overdose and are waiting for results to confirm. I guess we'll see when the report is finished.
How's protecting those kids by putting them in danger going?
Oh - a kid you wanted to kill us dead - all part of the plan.
These lawmakers are knowingly lying for personal gain, and to kill those they don't like - including kids. They're fucking demons, and their supporters are either as bad, or mentally deficient.
I think this is a direct effect of Trump's behavior. It is ok now to openly celebrate the death of a teen. Also ok to openly follow someone who does this. There are so many people going confidently "yeah, i grab 'em by the pussy, so what?", it's really sickening.
No, it is not.
Trump's behavior and by extension theirs is the result of liberals not taking this shit seriously
Yes, also.
They didn't take it seriously, generally took too long to respond and when they responded, there were already 10 new things ( that were worse ) that had to be addressed.
In case everyone wasn’t aware, Ryan Walters hired Chaya/Libs of TikTok to check our libraries.
They were 16, people that beat them up were "older girls". Surely they will charge them as adults right?
Nah they will just claim religious persecution and "it will ruin their life" throw in them "fearing for their safety" being the right race and gender. At most they are looking at community service.
I think the system is going to suddenly find a lot of excuses not to do that. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the police suddenly decided they had no place enforcing adult laws in school and saying this is a learning moment...
I think the system is going to suddenly find a lot of excuses not to do that.
I mean, they're young girls and probably white so the justice system is going to do everything it can to avoid holding them accountable before you even get to it being a nonbinary victim in a red state. Even if they're charged and convicted as adults I'd be shocked if they get worse than probation and maybe a suspended sentence at worst. Names withheld by media, of course.
Conservatism is a plague of oppression, violence and death. It always has been. There is no place in a modern society for conservatism.
When you see your conservative neighbors, co-workers and relatives, remember they killed this innocent child. They did this.
Ancient Roman Conservatives (Optimates, cause of course) "Look when you lift their skirts, you find a Populare (Democrat). We need to bring back traditional values!"
Since the days of yore, always about traditional fucking values.
And like now they aren’t. It’s a factionalized past constructed by the traditionalists.
I'm not going to aggressively confront my simple conservative acquaintances as if they themselves did this, but I do think it's a moral obligation to root out and identify why our acquaintances support a regressive, fearful, and hateful brand of politics. Like any sale made, it has to be the customer's choice, or at least the illusion of choice. You'll never convert anyone to a more Leftist brand of looking at the world if your ideology seems aggressive or unhinged. We're trying to make conservatism look less ideal than leftism.
So true. There must be no forgiveness, no tolerance, no acceptance. Conservatives must be purged from this planet. This is the ONLY way forward, if we want a society that is good for everybody.
That is not at all what they are saying.
So? That's what I am saying. What are they saying in your opinion? To silently seethe at the conservatives while not doing anything?
You are mocking a call to violence in which there is none. They're saying conservatism (the belief, the ideology) needs to die.
Conservatives should be openly mocked and ridiculed for their cruelty and violence. They should be laughed out of office.
You are being entirely idealistic. You are saying things that sound nice to you without considering how realistic they are.
You cannot attack an ideology without attacking the people who make up that ideology. They cannot be cleanly distinguished from each other.
At some level you even realize this.
Conservatives should be openly mocked and ridiculed for their cruelty and violence. They should be laughed out of office.
This means attacking the people. You are talking about making conservatives social pariahs, having them lose their livelihoods and power.
So yes, destroy conservatism, but if you don't have the stomach to do everything that simple statement entails, get out of my way.
You cannot attack an ideology without attacking the people who make up that ideology. They cannot be cleanly distinguished from each other.
Quit your bullshit. Dunking on shitty beliefs does not equate to killing or hurting people like you were suggesting.
This means attacking the people.
Good job moving the goal posts. First it was purging. Now it's being made out to be social pariahs. Pick one, and quit equating scorn with violence.
No one hasn't mentioned violence except you. The word "attack" can mean many things.
"Owasso police issued a subsequent statement on 21 February to say that an autopsy indicated that Nex had not died as a result of trauma." STFU
Ah yes. The totally normal spontaneous death of a 16 year old completely unrelated to the physical trauma suffered just before. You conservative apologists are always so fast to jump to conspiracy, why not now?
Reminds me of a bit from a web serial called Pale:
“I was in my rights to weaken him.”
“You shot the man in the head, you said,” Musser replied.
“It left him very weak, yes. He died shortly after.”
Mostly I wanted to tell you drama queen fucks to stfu bout blaming half a nation.
Not even close to half lmao
Enjoy the next Trump presidency.
literally hoping for a rapist insurrectionist to be president
Reactionaries be wildin
Do you understand anything people say to you or do you just twist the meaning and play dumb to score points in your own head?
Oh don't worry, I understand dog whistles very well 😋😋😋
@return2ozma Conservatives see this and applaud. This makes them happy. It puts a smile on their faces, but then they'll turn around and argue online that it's not about blind hate. They all know, deep down, that they're evil pieces of shit. They DO KNOW and perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to half convince themselves otherwise.
Every time they see the evil they're doing in the world this hypocritical dichotomy churns in their brains, and I hope on their deathbed they're consumed by it.
Yeah seriously. I thought they were pro life..?
Not pro-life, but anti-choice.
You'll notice this trend continues beyond the topic of women's health.
History will remember them the way we remember the racists who upheld Jim Crow in the American south.
This makes me sick to my stomach. This poor person just wanted to be themselves. Fuck our society, time to start over
Fuck all of these Shitty Republican Christians for killing this child.
I hope every last one of these Republicans get jailed for this murder but we all know that no one will face any actual consequences for this fine example of Shitty Republican Christian love.
The Republicans must read a different Bible or maybe I read it wrong
They read a proper one, but completely ignore the parts they don't like and twist/exagerate the parts they like.
I wonder how they respond to concerns over them not looking after the environment or the poor/marginalised.
Those are in the part of the Bible that they are ignoring
All the panic from Right-Wing cultists has real danger for people. I’m so sorry that people failed Nex. I hope people will be held accountable.
Direct result of the bathroom laws and other transphobic policies because it emboldens the most fucked up to act out and think they can get away with it (as they probably will)
Teenage girls are psychotic, getting into fights with a trans kid and beating them to a pulp. How many psychotically violent teens are in schools?
All of them. Some are better at self control, but none of us were sane.
Seriously. How can anyone expect us to be when our skull meatballs were still congealing?
I’m sure every American here has stories. The only reason I and my friends were never bullied much was early on in 6th grade, I stuffed a jock into their locker.
The thing was he was trying to stuff a friend of mine in a locker; with his coach as hall monitor (“boys will be boys,”).
For the record the only thing that I could get to fit was his head and shoulders. Also, the fire dept was breaking out the jaws of life when the lunch lady showed up with bacon grease… so he spent the first ten or so minutes of every class trying to make shit up about that… while everyone knew.
Edit to clarify: this isn’t to detract how awful this is, and from trans hate. Just pointing out bullying in schools has been a thing since long before I was in school; and it’s gotten worse. Schools are underfunded, under staffed and over stuffed (with students.); and that’s entirely by design. If “normal” people have stories… I shudder to think of what that kid and other trans kids have to go through.
I find it hard to believe he got stuck that badly.
A lot. I may not have been aware that I was trans back when I was a kid but growing up became a very lonely existence once girls and boys isolated themselves into their little tribes. When the siloing process sticks you with a peer group that implicitly knows you to be an ill fit and even when you try to get along your brain doesn't register that gendered sense of "this is a person who acts and thinks like me" you don't as a habit really make very close friends.
Kids are very good at forming hardcore social bonds where they let their sense of individual identity slip in favor of their group. While I didn't experience trans hate growing up directly persay being placed in situations where you just can't make decent bonds tends to make you an easy target for being ripped to shreds as somebody else's exercise of building pack solidarity. It takes very little for children to find justification to be violent.
I wasn't commenting on that, just that the new york post means nothing. Regardless, I frankly don't give a shit what the police say; they're not exactly known for telling the truth.
Right, it's easy to just make up your mind about something (with no evidence), when everyone who is telling you otherwise can be labeled as nazis, pigs, murderers, or whatever the Current Thing happens to be 🤭
Right, it’s easy to just make up your mind about something (with no evidence)
"I don't trust X" != "I've made up my mind"
What have you not made up your mind about?
I'm am not /u/HandBreadedTools. Go ask them.
Let's say the kid offed themself. Are we really going to pretend that the continued bullying and the school's inaction would have had nothing to do with that?
Conservative thinking killed this beautiful child. Every conservative is to blame.
Does this logic apply to crimes committed by immigrants?
"Immigrant thinking killed this beautiful child. Every immigrant is to blame."
Hmmmm, I'm not sure what immigrant ideology is, or where all the oppressive legislation that immigrants passed is, but I'm sure you can find a way to scapegoat people you hate.
You know the drill, just keep asking more and more absurd questions with confidence, and when someone says you are driving people to a hateful conclusion with loaded questions, you can just say "what, I can't ask questions anymore? What happened to free speech?"
If you make more stuff up, you can't paint me as Hitler
Immigrants don't as a group do everything in their political power to fuck people over...
Republicans and Conservatives do.
I think we should try to answer this rather than just down voting.
I think the difference is that conservative thinking led to the policy that led to the person being targeted, and possibly also to a climate of intolerance that made the attacker/s feel like they had the support of the community to do that. We're not really talking about who is too blame for this individual instance (obviously that's the person/s who manslaughtered this child). We're talking bigger picture.
When an immigrant commits a crime, I suppose you would argue that liberal thinking created the situation where that could happen, but I think it's a false equivalence. Big picture immigrants don't disproportionately commit crime, and there are major benefits that come with immigration. While trans people absolutely are disproportionately the victims of violence, and there are no real benefits to transphobic policies.
I guess I haven't done great at this, please other people build on this reply, it just felt wrong to see a fair enough question just being downvoted with no reply.
Just a troll, downvote and move on
I mean that was possibly their intention, but nevertheless I think it is a reasonable question to ask, and I found it difficult to answer comprehensively.
If we dismiss everything like this as troll, and not worth thinking about, we miss an opportunity to develop point of view and add nuance to our arguments.
?????
Still waiting for the day people take this seriously. Maybe just a couple more decades to go :/
This has always been the intent.
the people who make the laws simply do not care about dead trans people. to them that is one step closer to the world they want.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Of course not. Empowering women, poc and the LGBTQ+ community would actively hurt them being in power. So better to make laws to keep those groups at the bottom.
"dead trans people were going to vote for the other guys anyhow" - Republicans
This was always the plan!
Since head trauma was ruled out, I wonder what happened 💉
Should have been a Destiny fan, then this wouldn’t have happened. /s
Absolutely gross, disgusting, evil, impossible to reason with.
Unrelated: what kind of name is "Nex"?
What kind of names are Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Judas, Jesus? They are all just the sound of meat flapping around.
What kind of names are Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Judas, Jesus?
Historically established names which the populous, in near unanimity, decided are good and worth reusing. Call me old fashioned if you want, but I'd rather see yet another John than someone named mr. mxyzptlk
And I suppose allowing people to you use whatever bathrooms they want would end bullying?
They aren't using whatever bathrooms they want. They are using the bathroom that people of their gender are supposed to use.
But do explain to us why you want this man to be in a women's bathroom. Or locker room.
That is Ben Melzer. He is a male model. He was also born biologically female.
Do you think women would feel comfortable or safe with him in there?
It could definitely remove one of the most notorious and dangerous places kids get bullied.
Just because you want to be a peeping Tom and watch folks in the bathroom doesn't mean everyone else does.
It could definitely remove one of the most notorious and dangerous places kids get bullied.
Really? Please explain how that wouldn't make them 10x more likely to be bullied. I'll wait.
Just because you want to be a peeping Tom
Ah yeah, prove your point with personal insults, that's convincing.
What's your proposal, then?
Considering they think being trans is a choice, I think you can guess what their proposal is.
Considering this person thinks being trans means you are whatever gender you look like I think you can guess they're a TERF.
Oh I know they're a TERF.
I don't think anyone is saying changing bathrooms will end bullying. Judging by the conversation I'm seeing I think most people are upset that a child in a government institution was physically beaten to death.
Although based on your comment it doesn't seem like you're on the same page as those people.
Top voted comment is
All part of their plan
Weird cuz there's an entire sentence in the headline of this article that mentions banning bathrooms. What do you think they were implying by that?
E: Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Lots of downvoters and no answers.
This whole post and all its threads are a ducking train wreck.
Anyway... Looking beyond the headline "Oklahoma governor Kevin Stitt signed a bill that required public school students to use bathrooms that matched the sex listed on their birth certificates."
I think that's fucked because it others trans people and sends the message that hating trans people is ok. And I think that makes assholes more likely to be violent towards trans people.
And also a trans kid in this was beaten to death, and might have survived had the school called a goddamn ambulance, or if they had done anything to counter anti-trans hate.
Idk what the duck do you want to hear exactly?
That we should force trans kids to use the bathroom of their birth certificate sex? Or that we shouldn't?
Maybe instead of dancing around with questions just state your opinion?
Idk what the duck do you want to hear exactly?
I want to hear exactly what I asked for. That the author is dishonestly blaming this senseless death on bathroom laws. That they're rage-baiting to feed the machine that stifles any sort of progress.
I want to hear an actual answer to the questions I ask instead of deflection.
I want you to acknowledge disinformation, even when it comes from "your side".
No, but I don't see why that's a reason not to allow people to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity. Do you have an actual argument you wanted to make, or are you just asking stupid questions?
The title of this article is very obviously suggesting that someone died as a direct result of bathroom laws.
When the state shows solidarity with anti-trans bigots it emboldens those bigots to act out.
Anyway your comment distracts from the real issue.
Some people hate trans people enough to kill them just for existing. That is patently wrong, outrageous, disgusting, immoral, sickening, and horrific.
If I see anyone insulting, injuring, or harassing a person with bigoted insults, I will be compelled to do something to stop it. I'm fucking sick to death of fucking nazis acting with impunity. They need to creep back into the sewers where they came from and STFU.
Anyway your comment distracts from the real issue.
There are several issues. The fact that you deflect and refuse to acknowledge one for the other just proves that I'm right.
What is the issue they’re trying to deflect?
Scroll up
You haven't complained about any "issue". You're just asking questions and speaking vaguely. What is your point?
I've been extremely specific about my concern. If you want to cover your eyes and pretend you can't see it, that's not something I can help you with. Goodbye.
Your argument has basically been "anti-trans bathroom rules didn't actually kill this child, so I don't care that this child is dead", and you're getting downvoted because that's a disgusting stance for anyone to take. Everyone can plainly see that transphobia motivated these bathroom rules, as well as the attack that lead to a dead child.
While everyone else rightfully condemns hate, you're in here spewing it. Now make good on your "goodbye" and go the fuck away.
Your argument has basically been "anti-trans bathroom rules didn't actually kill this child, so I don't care that this child is dead"
No, you're justlying. I never said anything that remotely resembled that statement.
Trans kid was murdered. Any decent human being considers that the main issue.
The kid wasn't killed directly because of the laws but because of anti-trans hate. Bathroom laws only foment that hate.
Any decent human being considers that the main issue.
It is the main issue. That doesn't mean all other issues suddenly cease to exist.
The kid wasn't killed directly because of the laws
They weren't killed at all because of the laws, which the title of this article is obviously implying.
Why does no one cares that the author is intentionally spreading disinformation?
"The bullying had started in earnest at the beginning of the 2023 school year, a few months after Oklahoma governor Kevin Stitt signed a bill that required public school students to use bathrooms that matched the sex listed on their birth certificates."
Nex was assaulted in the bathroom. The article doesn't go into detail, but based on context, Nex outwardly appeared like a boy, but was forced the use the girls bathroom. Laws that don't specifically call for inequality can still be used to harass very targeted and specific group. This is why getting rid of ridiculous bathroom bills is important, and this is why Republicans push so hard to implement them. It's not about creating safer environment for most people, but about creating a very obvious, uncomfortable, and unsafe environment for a very specific group of people, in this case, transgender and non-binary people.
Nex outwardly appeared like a boy, but was forced the use the girls bathroom.
Okay? I supposed if they used the boys' bathroom they would have been fine? Because teenage boys are known for their kind nature and never physically bully anyone? And they totally wouldn't have been even more susceptible to bullying?
And I suppose teenage boys would never abuse this new law to be granted access and harass girls in the girls' bathroom?
Again, this is speculation. I think the article correctly refuses to identify Nex's apparent and "legal" gender.
I supposed if they used the boys’ bathroom they would have been fine?
Yes, probably. The 3 older girls probably would not have assaulted Nex in the boys bathroom.
Because teenage boys are known for their kind nature and never physically bully anyone?
Empty rhetorical question with no relevancy to the problem at hand.
And they totally wouldn’t have been even more susceptible to bullying?
More empty rehtoric. Disregarding.
And I suppose teenage boys would never abuse this new law to be granted access and harass girls in the girls’ bathroom?
Mostly empty rhetoric here, but the data does not support the argument that boys are temporarily claiming to be girls so they can hang out in the girls bathroom. It's not like there is some kind of physical barrier preventing people of the incorrect gender from entering a bathroom, you can just walk right in. If a woman goes into the women's bathroom, and peeps on other women who are just trying to shit in peace, she would get reported, and should suffer the same consequences as man that goes in the women's bathroom to peep.
Again, this is speculation.
...what is?
Yes, probably. The 3 older girls probably would not have assaulted Nex in the boys bathroom.
LOL you're intentionally reframing the question and ignoring the new potential issue you know exists, and examining the situation with a pinhole POV. You're obviously not interested in an honest discussion.
Empty rhetorical question with no relevancy to the problem at hand.
LOL of course it's relevant. Your assertion (and the author's) is that Nex would have somehow been safer in a boys' bathroom, because of their physical appearance. As if boys are somehow less likely to beat on a trans kid.
More empty rehtoric. Disregarding.
Why am I not surprised that you're "disregarding" pressing questions about your narrative.
the data does not support the argument that boys are temporarily claiming to be girls so they can hang out in the girls bathroom.
Right, and what "data" supports the idea that genderless bathrooms are safer for trans people?
We are speculating on Nex's apparent and "legal" gender. We are speculating on the situation under which the assault occured, since there aren't concrete facts available due to (most likely) representation and privacy concerns for Nex.
Whether or not Nex would have been assaulted or bullied in the boys restroom is a pointless deviation from your original question that I answered. Roughly paraphrased to "What does this assault have to do with bathroom laws in the US" Nex was, based on the context, mostly likely assaulted and bullied due to a law forcing them to use a bathroom that did not match their apparent gender. Yes, the assault could have occured in the boys restroom, but it didn't. We can't focus on what could have happened in the other restroom because then we bring in to question whether or not the assault could have happened anywhere, like the cafeteria, hallways, classroom, etc... its an empty unrelated argument to say that assault could have happen somewhere else. That is why I am disregarding those statements.
Right, and what “data” supports the idea that genderless bathrooms are safer for trans people?
You must have misunderstood the statement. My point is that men are not claiming to be women in order to circumvent bathroom privacy and peep on people taking a shit, and if they did, they would suffer the same legal consequences as a woman peeping on other women in the bathroom.
All part of their plan.
"Fuck them kids" -Republicans
You've got Matt Gaetz's attention.
You'll get called dramatic for saying that but Republicans are absolutely eyeing a form of trans genocide; removing access to treatment and creating as hostile and dangerous an environment possible for trans people. They want us to disappear.
100% trans genocide is the point.
I'm just some cis dude but I'm in your corner bro/sis/enby buddy ❤️
And my axe.
Thank you <3
It's infuriating and scary they way it feels most people miss that, I just want to live my life, maybe even love it. But with the billionaires on one hand and the bigots on the other it's really hard on so many levels. There's an element of fear and uncertainty in my home and I am sure in many others. The fear of self sustainability, looming threats of homelessness and poverty if there is anything to disrupt our productivity for the owning class along with making decisions based on when, not if, unjust laws are passed that threaten our very existence. Saving and moving house, trying to get to a point where we eventually live in a northern haven isn't a retirement prospect, a grasp for opportunity, or a change of scenery, it's a requirement to make sure we can continue the being alive part.
Sometimes it is hard when the future seems so bleak and I spend so much of my time barely keeping my head above water, having a seemingly lofty goal as a near necessity. This society is a fucking joke, but at least there are people, like you, in our corner. Hopefully in time things can unshittify but things are getting bad, fast, at the moment.
At the same time, I can't help but feel so incredibly lucky despite everything, There are people facing harsher systemic difficulties, less access to opportunity, and harsher local conditions. Despite everything I'm alive, I'm here now, and it makes me angry, and sad, that people like Nex are forced to end the fight so early due to heartless politicians and their base of vultures.
Sorry to trauma dump, it's been brutal lately.
No disagreement here. I don't like that "savior" stereotype but IDK I hope it helps to see someone outside the affected groups just agree that yes, it is a load of hyper bullshit and no you're not fucking crazy.
Y'all keep fighting, and I'll keep getting in trouble in my Bible belt dive bars for telling people they can eat my whole ass for saying dumbass shit.
You aren't being dramatic as long as there are shamans all minorities are targets. We know exactly what Abrahamic theocracies are like.
Don't want to be born? TOO BAD! --Republicans
Yep, inevitable and intended consequences.
Ofc cops want a toxicology report on the victim instead of testing the perpetrators.
ACAB
To be fair, according to the article, the victim collapsed and stopped breathing the day after the altercation, probably leading them to believe they might have taken some substance subs then that could've caused this.
I don't think it's unreasonable to do a toxicology test.
Testing the other kids for what? An overdose of "fight in the girls bathroom" meds? Make some sense.
Yes, that's kind of how an investigation works you dingbat.
If you left out calling them a dingbat your point is exactly the same.
Transphobic shit bags are seeking out stories about Nex and seeing what they can get away with because they know it's a really good opportunity for them to grind salt into some peoples' wounds
Once again. Calling people names didn't reinforce your point. It usually does the opposite. Your anger doesn't make your point more poignant.
Your politeness doesn't make you more right.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_policing
https://everydayfeminism.com/2015/12/tone-policing-and-privilege/
I'm not saying anything other that calling people names doesn't accomplish anything. I have zero contempt for anyone holding anyone back from who they are. I am literally not on any side and simply pointing out that calling people names does not seem mature and puts people off. If you can't handle that feedback that is your problem.
Not really, but do go on with your transphobic remarks.
Can you point out what that person said that was transphobic? From the reply it just seems like that they were pointing out that a toxicology report is something that's fairly routine. What did I miss?
It's pretty common to see transphobes wading into this sort of stuff with the same kind of arguments that racists use about police murdering black people, etc. That support of the system because the system is oppressing a minority they don't like kind of thing where they turn a blind eye to any context.
I'm not gonna wade into that kind of debate, but to me, the big issue is what I saw somebody else say: that the police aren't even going to consider whether or not a crime was committed until after they get the toxicology report, despite knowing that the person in question was assaulted like the day before.
Like the cops, focusing on the toxicology report alone is an easy way to erase everything else about what happened. Having a toxicology done isn't transphobic, but focusing only on that and when it comes back clean, ruling it as a freak accident and not following up on the assault? That would be transphobic as hell and wouldn't be the first or last time the cops did something like that.
Here's my issue, when you call someone a transphobe (or racist, or pedophile, etc) when they haven't actually been transphobic, you water down the meaning. It just becomes a thing you say that lost it's meaning, rather than the big deal it is.
Why would they before they finish investigating? What's the charge? Simple assault, assault and battery, manslaughter, negligent homicide, second degree murder? If you don't have all the facts you can't charge them properly.
Maybe the police have an interest in burying the charges, but if you don't know that, you shouldn't claim it. Because the best way to secure a conviction is to thoroughly investigate first, then bring charges once the information has been gathered. Anything else is laying the groundwork for a defense attorney.
Ok, agreed. But that hasn't happened yet. Reacting to something that hasn't happened just allows other people to ignore you and your concerns about trans rights. I would caution against that approach. If they don't take action once the info is in, or blame the victim, then you get mad as hell. Best of luck!
Yeah, when I said that I wasn't gonna wade into the argument, I meant on whether or not they were actually being transphobic, because that one line simply isn't enough to say what their motivation is.
As for the cops, the issue is that they're doing a toxicology, but not following up on the assault in any form. They could be investigating that as well while they wait on the report, but they're actively holding off on doing that.
The included insult, however mild, must be seen as an attempt to denigrate QUESTIONING the police methods, as if the environment was "obviously" fair and balanced. He might have not meant it that way, but even then it's an example of the moderate being the true enemy of the oppressed. So it's either a tactic, siding with a fascist system or at best inconsiderate.
No it doesn't. That's ridiculous to insist it must be viewed in that manner. That's your reductionist view.
So he may not have meant it that way, but we must view it that way? Absolutely insane take.
Here's the real issue, you've created a litmus test that no one is pure enough to meet. Rather than accepting allies for trans rights, you want to push them away. If they aren't as reactionary and reductionist as you then they must be the enemy. Truly alarming. You're the problem, you allow the "moderates" (as you call them), who might otherwise support trans rights to oppose them by pushing them out and calling them transphobic.
I'm not calling anybody anything, I'm criticizing a behavior. And someone called the comment transphobic, not the poster.
It's about how fascist strategy works. And part of that is an appeal to order for the moderates. This book (excepts) talks a lot about this stuff.
This is a life-or-death fight against fascism. Literally in this case. But the fascists won't stop with trans people.
There is a very clear fascist movement that is rapidly growing in strength in the US. First the rhetoric, the attacks on teachers, the bullying, then physical violence, the maliciousness or incompetence of the school, now a 16 year old kid is dead. Then the police are waiting and then say her sudden death had nothing to do with the attack.
Maybe the police is right? Or maybe they are biased or maybe they are fascist?
Reading all this makes people sad and angry they criticizes the police.
Now someone calls him a dingbat for jumping to conclusions.
His remarks (not the person) are being called out as transphobic.
And THAT enrages you THAT creates this outrage in you of how awful it is to get angry at people who push back against outrage at the police. Not the death, not the police makes you angry, but this incredibly injustice! This is what you chose to make comments about.
It's the presumption that the police system works as intended and should work like this and shouldn't be criticized. Coupled with an insult. It's outrageous. I'm not calling it transphobic, I'm calling it the "negative peace" that moderates prefer (see MLK about white moderates) and works in support of fascism.
When did 'dingbat' become transphobic?
Has 'dingbat' become a new epithet for trans people?
Because it apparently originally was the name of an alcoholic drink and has been used to describe a stupid person since 1905.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/dingbat
Care to tell us where you heard that the word was transphobic?
It's also a style of architecture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingbat_%28building%29
That's unfortunate for the small local music and dive bar near me called dingbatz then...
Maybe it's named after the printer's ornament?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingbat
If it's in Clifton, those guys support white power bands 😕
It is... oh boy. I have only been twice since my friend has a metal band that plays there sometimes. I never knew and I doubt he knows that as well since he is definitely not into that either.
Yeah, it's definitely not as widely-known a thing as it should be. Plenty of perfectly respectable bands play there too, still... but also some Nazis
What part of what they said is transphobic?
OH NOW YOU TOO HUH
/s
It’s funny, because I literally just left a thread in which I was agreeing with them and then I saw the notification of your comment.
Impressive amount of downvotes. Troll successful, I guess
You know, sometimes you ACAB people are just as annoying as the bootlickers
Nah.
Everyone knows being distrustful of authority is the same thing as actively endorsing fascism.
Yes that’s why the saying goes: “Pine for authoritarian strongmen” and not: “Question authority” or some shit.
THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE TO ARM UP AND BE SEEN READY TO FIGHT
These people know you're a doormat and a pushover.
I have to admit, one of my first emotional responses was anger. I want vengeance. When will we see the day the bullies, abusers, murderers, and their enablers receive justice?
Not civilized "justice" in court rooms, on pieces of paper, with well-dressed men and women arguing politely over legal arcana.
Blood for blood. There should be a mortal fear that if they harm one hair on our heads, something worse will happen to them by far.
Don't tell me this won't bring anyone back. Don't tell me to be better than our enemies. If you will assault someone over their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, you don't deserve the breath of life.
The problem with mob justice is lack of due process. It frequency gets the wrong person as it can't be reasoned with.
The problem with mob justice is that it can be leveraged directly in to fascism. This is exactly what happened with the French Revolution and the Soviet one. In both cases valid anger against oppression was directed in to paranoia that allowed for the reestablishment of an authoritarian order instead of liberation. Anger is foolish and easily manipulated. That's why it's the only emotion the right wants anyone to experience. That's why it's the only emotion patriarchy allows men to express.
Anger is good for destroying things. Some things need to be destroyed. But those things that need to be destroyed are systems, not people.
Anger is activating and should absolutely drive you to action, but the action you take shouldn't also be decided by the anger. Let anger wake you up, and compassion guide the action you take.
History repeats itself, at least most of the time. That's why we should learn from the past because humans haven't changed that much in the way we think under certain circumstances.
No, I'm sorry, if a person was bullied for a year, that was the time for "due process" to protect them and society by preventing further harm. Now it is too late.
They caused someone to die by their violent actions, I am fully in favor of violent retaliation here, and as I said not looking to be convinced otherwise.
There are some things our society gets right, and some things it gets wrong. Passivity in the face of violence is a mistake IMO.
It's never too late for justice to be done. Though more of it has to done the later it is left. No one is talking passivity here. Everyone wants something done this time and done sooner next time.
Mob justice is not justice at all.
Edit: english
Yes it is
Anarchy doesn't work.
Anarchy was never mentioned.
That is mob rule. It's not the rule of law.
That is not what mob rule is, and this literally has nothing to do with government
Mob rule is the breakdown of law and order. Which a failing of governance.
You mean like we have now with psychotic and treasonous christofascists trying to destroy freedom while you complain about "law and order"?
You have never existed in the real world, buddy
Yeah, and if you remove justice by due process by installing fascist bigots in all positions of the judicial system, then all you're left with is mob justice. And we ought to be angry about that too.
It's a social contract thing. Conservatives insist on being granted all of the benefits you get by signing an accord with the rest of us, but then act as though they are exempt from it's requirements.
As far as I'm concerned, they aren't covered by the agreement anymore, and should be deprived of any protection offered by it.
Another person murdered by Christianity.
This isn't "Christianity". And that's not to defend the religion, but it is just one head of this Hydra, not the core of the problem. People in power are using hate and fear in whatever medium they can to consolidate and increase that power, casualties be damned.
They all just happen to be religious by coincidence.
Religion is the tool, not the motive.
There are those that practice their faith the way it should be practiced, without causing harm to others.
And then there are others who want power, and will use the tool to manipulate others, to get that power.
But there's a reason why the tool is always religion
You'd be foolish to think that that is the only tool available for people to manipulate others with.
No one is saying that it is.
I was responding to a comment from someone else, and not from you...
If it's always religion then it can't be anything else, right? So that person was indirectly stating that's the only tool, and I was pointing out that there's multiple ways of manipulating others, besides religion.
Tell me the Bible passage that says that.
Because people are just their books, and have no free will of their own.
You point to me in the New Testament where Jesus himself advocates violence and harm to innocents, and then we can have a conversation.
Very well. In that case I want a citation. How did you determine the "right" way and why is everyone else wrong?
I already did this in this thread. Come on some level of effort on your point. He does it repeatedly! He talks about how he will be the future king and his enemies will be butchered then sent to hell. He makes a woman beg at his feet while calling herself a racial slur before he helps her kid. He rebukes a man with leprosy for having leprosy. He tells people to give up all means of support and their own families just to follow him.
You're being intellectually dishonest to suggest that I'm saying everyone else is wrong, as the point I'm trying to make is not that at all, that you can't judge a whole people based on what their religion is, as people have free will and follow there religion to their modern worldview, and see what are you with me not just what ancient text stated verbaten.
As far as how I determine what the right way is, I do it via The Golden Rule. Do onto to others, as you would have others do unto you. Basically, what Jesus taught at a summary level. Be kind of others, don't harm them help where you can, etc.
And for the record, I'm not a Christian, just in case you think you're arguing against one.
I would love to have a Christian scholar review what you're saying, especially the quotes that you're stating are coming from Jesus, for factuality.
And the classic justification is torturing/murdering people was needed to save their souls which is what you would want.
He didn't teach that. He didn't exist. The idea predates the Bible by over five centuries in India, via trade routes and scholar migration it entered into that part of the world. It seems to have entered into Judaism about 50 or so BCE where it was attributed to Rabbi Hillel who has some superficial resemblance to the Jesus of Matthew.
Very well. Would you mind commiting blasphemy against the Holy Ghost for me? A non-christian should have no problem with the unforgivable sin of Christianity.
The Bible is freely available online. Do your own work.
How the fuck do you get from what was said above to what is said down below?...
Because I want others to murder me right. Jesus Christ.
Okay dude, I tried, honestly, but I'm blocking you. You're literally the first person I've ever blocked on Lemmy, but you're just not worth talking to.
Not my logic. I am pointing out the train of thought coming from St. Augustine in City of God onward. It is better to kill a hertic and give them a chance at heaven vs letting them live and they get no chance. If you don't like that logic please invent a time machine and stop the witching burnings plus all the other awful stuff Christians did.
Where did I say it wasn't part of the problem? I said the exact opposite, in fact.
This is exactly Christianity. Their book tells them to act this way and their shamans have been screaming for this conduct for twenty centuries. Every single Christian I have dealt with is about one bad day away from doing this and why shouldn't they? The have skydaddy telling them that they will be forgiven for everything and that it is a good thing to oppress the LGBT.
Again, I'm not defending the religion, just saying that blaming one thing here is missing the mountain of other contributing factors. If we erased christianity and every other religion you want gone from the world, the hate and fear would still be there, as would the people manipulating that to benefit themselves.
If cancer were cured tomorrow people would still die eventually, but I would rather live in a world without cancer than one with it.
Great metaphor, actually, since cancer is most often caused or exacerbated by something else. But you're still missing my point by a mile. Keeping going after the symptom rather than the sickness, I guess. I'm sure that'll solve everything.
I got your point. You refuse to address the issue and instead want us all to wander around in circles finding "deeper" reasons.
Swing and a miss again.
Nope.
I don't mean to be disrespectful to those who you are replying to, but are you sure those are even regular people you're talking to, and not bots?
Either they're very fanatical and can't see outside of their box, or they're being intellectually dishonest in how they respond to you, seeming to miss your point that's being expressed very well and straightforward.
Eh, I don't think so. People (understandably) hyper-focus on religion, and Christianity in particular, and the terrible things done under them, and it can be hard to get them to view the larger scope of the situation.
Fair enough, but they seem to be overly obtuse about it, to a fault.
Nope human. Got meat organs and everything. I love how the only defense of religion is to personally attack the guy calling out what it does
Granted, I missed Jesus's sermon on the hill, but I'm sure I would have heard something about him okaying bullying and killing good people just because they're different.
Christian fundamentalists don't have nothing in common with Jesus. They are fake christians. Jesus preached tolerance so many times. They fucking don't get it that they ignore him completely.
That's the point I've been trying to make. That when everyone says Christians are bad there's actually two types of Christians, the Jesus type, and the modern Christians who use the name but don't act like how Jesus would want them to.
Do the Jesus types live in Scotland with the True Scots?
You know I do find it kind of weird to bring up the no true scotsman fallacy in this shit, when the real point of that fallacy is just kind of to get people to be conscious that their mental definitions don't actually exist in reality, and they have to work from a formal definition, right? But I think, without getting into the specifics of like, that guy's biblical interpretation, it's pretty obvious that they have a definition of "christian" that doesn't line up with the others.
You might, instead of bringing up the scotsman fallacy, have better luck in hitting them with what the scotsman fallacy hearkens to, and asking them for a clear definition that you might then be able to push back on with counterexample.
Basically, I am accusing you of the fallacy fallacy.
Jesus didn't exist. The fictional person in the Gospels preached a doctrine that his was the only way to salvation and all other ways lead to hell. That one does not have the right to basic sexuality, property, and what they say.
That is not any form of tolerance I have ever heard of. One the rejects freedom of religion, expression, sexual preferences, and possessions. What possible tolerance could there be in a world where a shaman can order you to only worship him, to hand over all your stuff, to love only whom he approves of, and only say what he wants you to say?
Ballsy of you to say that. I'd like to know what proof you have of that.
Honestly not saying that you're wrong, but it's really tired of people who say things with such certainty when they're just pulling it out of one of their orifices.
[Citation Required.]
Chiming in here to say that generally you need proof of positive claims in a debate, rather than proof of negative claims. Claiming dragons are real requires evidence, claiming that they are not real, well, I mean, first you'd have to establish a definition of what dragons are, but mostly, it wouldn't require evidence to claim they're not real, because proving such a thing would be a feat an order of magnitude greater than proving they exist.
In any case, have fun with your debate.
Well aware but thanks. I gave my evidence.
I'm not asking him to prove a negative, I'm asking him to prove his firm assertion that Jesus did not exist.
My understanding is there's no conclusive evidence either way, so when somebody states either one of the extremes, that he absolutely existed, or he absolutely did not exist, I want to know where their proof is coming from that allows him to say such a thing with such certainty, because I know the evidence is inconclusive (at least at the last time I took a look into it).
I've actually blocked him at this point, so there won't be any further debate. My first block on Lemmy actually, I try very hard never to do that.
Yeah I kinda brain farted on positive vs negative claims there, it always confuses me as to whether or not you can make a positive claim on a statement about how something doesn't exist, and it's more about, the most reasonable thing is to not really know for sure one way or another, and you're actually making the negative claim against certainty. I dunno, confuses me still. On the rank, it would still make more sense to argue for a lack of a thing than for existence of a thing, right? Sort of along the lines of the raven paradox?
and nah, I had to do that earlier to a dickhead I was arguing with, very obviously bad faith, only cherry picked specific pieces of my arguments, you know how it goes.
tried very hard not to as well, but damn, that motherfucker kinda pissed me off, ngl. I dunno. I find I have a much higher hit rate on this website than any other, in terms of positive engagements, right, but because of that, I would also engage with people more here than on other platforms, where I might instead put in much less effort. so it's sort of a double edged sword, because people can much more easily waste my time. I think I've just come to the conclusion that I'm writing for myself as a creative exercise, beholden to my own standards, more than I'm writing specifically for them, you know?
at least, that mentality helps me.
It's best not to overthink it, as it seems you are doing (no offense meant).
If someone says 'a' is true, you can ask them how do you know 'a' is true, and if they just say oh because I know, then you can push further because that's just a bullshit answer. Especially so if you take the comment in relation to the whole conversation you're having with them, and the level of intellectual honesty they have in conversing with you.
As far as conversations go here on Lemmy, I'm not finding good quality of conversation here on Lemmy at all, and I'm seriously considering leaving and going back to Reddit because of that, unfortunately.
From the quality of new posts people are making to the arguments that end up happening right away inside of each one of them, it actually seems a lot worse than it was on Reddit. Good to hear it's working out well for you though.
yeah, I've probably fried my brain thinking too hard about it fs, just in general.
A lot of it is up to figuring out who's going to be the best person to engage with, which I think is pretty easily done just by looking at post length. Longer posts require higher effort, = this person will be more likely to engage in good faith. Trolls tend to leave little quips, rather than large spiels.
Also, lemmy, just like reddit, also tends to be, if not an echo chamber, then certainly, a place where you can see who's popular, and who's unpopular. Who holds the most mainstream "lemmy" opinion. I think it's generally better a lot of the time to engage with people who get a lot of downvotes, but seem to be acting in good faith otherwise, cause they have interesting opinions, and I think interrogating them is a good way to help them build their case, when otherwise it would just kinda be left to shit a lot of the time. The exception are political posts where you're going to have to uproot someone's whole worldview in order to make them see the light.
Weirdly counterintuitive, right, because you would expect most people to be more combative after going through the ringer of downvote oblivion, but it has been my experience that if you show them a modicum of sympathy they will respond to you oftentimes much better than a more popularly opinioned user might. I don't really know why this is, maybe it's because people perceive themselves to have some amount of power, or maybe it's just because users are more likely to respond to, and upvote, short quips, as we've seen kind of infect reddit, and obviously those people are not worth bothering 90% of the time.
I dunno, that's the only thing that strikes me maybe about your post pattern in this thread specifically, to do a better psychic reading I'd have to look at your other posts and I'm too lazy to do that rn. Hope any of what I said helps, though.
Sure. Total lack of contemporary evidence, lack of all relics from his life, the inability of anyone to keep basic biographical details about his life straight, clear and obvious plagiarism from texts in wide circulation at the time, lack of a dynasty, and easier explanations for the scarce data that we have.
You could write Paul's letters completely from just being told 2 things about Jesus and being familiar with Jewish and Greek writings. You could write the entire gospel of Mark with the letters and again some familiarity with the writings of the time. Matthew adds almost nothing. Luke-Acts just adds stuff about Paul.
Want the Euchrist? Guess what eating your god was a common mystery cult practice. Want a dead leader? All over Judaism start with the Maccabees. Want the last supper? Common fiction trope at the time. Want the Tomb? Again already in fiction. Feeding the multitudes and healing the sick? Easy, Elijiah.
Being serious? All that stuff about giving up your property to charity, ripping your eye out instead of looking with lust, condemning people for not saying that he was lord?
Yeah, I really am, honestly.
As I mentioned to you somewhere, I'm not a Christian.
So if you actually got proof that Jesus is a bastard please do so. Be specific about it and don't just say something without any connotation about who's saying it or where it's cited from. Because from all the quotes you've been making I literally can't touch tell which one of those are from Jesus.
I already gave this to you
This is all in there. NIV translation is what I used.
You know, I've been noticing more and more that lemmy has a bunch of people who just fuckin hate religion straight up, edgy 2010's reddit atheism style. I don't necessarily disagree with a lot of their criticisms, but it has gotten kind of annoying seeing people attribute these clearly complex and incentive driven behaviors to something so broad, so old, and so vague.
It seems pretty obvious to me personally that conservatives have kind of given up on contesting civil rights and gay rights as a means to differentiate themselves from the other neoliberals, since those issues remain pretty deeply unpopular to contest, and are moving to this as sort of the next thing in their playbook, the next highest profile minority that they can easily lambast on nightly news. All while they try to roll back those other issues through every possible angle they might be able to work in local, state, and federal government.
That's even a pretty big oversimplification of the issue, and the different forces involved, right, like it's not really tied into why or how specifically they're doing that, right, but it's really stupid to even have that surface level understanding, and still bump up against people insisting that it's more singularly some other driving, evil force. As though you couldn't, were you to analyze christianity, split such a thing up into another whole litany of forces, another whole network of relations, causes and effects.
It says right in the Bible that being LGBT is a sin worthy of being sent to hell and that Jesus wants his enemies killed. Do you need me to quote chapter and verse?
Hey you know what? I fully admit I am an angry atheist. That means I say mean little things sometimes. You know what I don't do? I don't beat a trans kid to death inside a school bathroom, I don't commit war crimes, and I dont descrate cultural sites.
You really want to both sides this? You really want to compare a few mean little comments to beating a child to death?
that's a pretty nice bait
@ech @afraid_of_zombies TBF it kinda is Christianity tho.
Which Christianity? Jesus', or today's modern-day Evangelical?
The same Christianity that wiped out the pagan faiths of Europe via mass murder, led a series of bloody wars into the "Holy" Land, plunged the former empire into the dark ages, burned books and people, repeatedly murdered each other over doctrine and any minority they could grab, built instruments of torture to go after supposed heretics, and not content with the horrors they subjected parts of the Middle East and all of Europe to went forward and introduced their rot to the rest of the world.
That Christianity. The burning at the stake, stabbing homosexuals with fire pokers, the genocidal against the Jews, the rape and pillage of Arab lands, the Christianity that imprisoned and tortured any free thinker. The same one that even today is quickly working to "deal" with the Muslims and the trans.
And why shouldn't it be exactly like that? The whole thing is modeled after one of the most repulsive characters in all of fiction.
I'm talking about individuals. You're talking about institutions. An institution is not made of 100% of individuals that all think exactly the same.
Pat Robertson is an individual. Want to talk about him?
You keep being intellectually dishonest. The Crusades and the other things you described were not done by Jesus, they were done by other men centuries later.
There's a clear disembarkation in philosophy between what Jesus spoke of and taught, and what regular people throughout the ages interpreted what he said as, for their own personal benefits.
Nothing in the Bible doesn't align with the crusades
I can't imagine -- don't want to imagine losing a child. I had no idea until I had a kid but... Nothing in the universe matters more to me than my kid and I would be destroyed forever if anything ever happened.
To lose a kid (very likely) due to bullying? I can't imagine the blind rage mixed in with the universe shattering grief.
What sick fucked world do we live in where school bullying turns into violence that turns into death? Just for being different from most? Jesus Christ. These psychopaths should be in jail getting intensive therapy to try to unfuck their twisted minds.
This child could have lived a full life but instead because of fearful, hateful monsters, the kid is dead.
Fuck Oklahoma and fuck this school and the parents of the murderers.
It's only going to get worse if Trump gets back in power. As if it isn't bad enough now.
Boy, girl, non binary, whatever WHO GIVES A FUCKING SHIT?! Mind your own goddamn business and don't be a fucking evil piece of shit. Let people fucking exist as they are.
My biggest fear is to outlive my daughter. And since she's queer (not trans, but queer), I worry about her being assaulted or even killed because of it, especially as people like Trump foster bigotry. Also, one of her closest friends is trans and I'm very worried about him. I know he's being bullied in school and he already has self-harm issues. Thankfully, his parents support his transition, but he's still not getting the support he needs and the school makes him use the girls bathroom and locker room. I hope he makes it through school okay. He's only 12 and he's already cutting himself, vaping and smoking weed.
I hope he finds the strength to get through this. Besides support from his family and having supportive friends, which no one should take for granted, there's overcoming the bullying and finally, the hardest of all, the inner conflict. Topple this with puberty's own ordeal, so everything gets even more confusing. But it's also the one task, that drops the most loot, if you solve it. There's nothing more rewarding than feeling inner peace, love yourself and coming of age strong and prosperous.
I do too. So much. I wish I could do something to help him, but I've only met him one time. I know the school he's in is utter shit. We pulled my daughter out and put her in online school because of how much she was bullied. The administration actually made her apologize to her bullies after they doxxed her on Discord and prank called her repeatedly. Fuck that school. If I could get her friend to do online school with her, I'd drive him to my house every day just to keep him away from that shit. I really wish I could.
This would indeed be a solution, what's deterring him to take the chance?
Doing online school, you mean? I don't know his parents and I wouldn't know how to convince them.
Do you think you'd be able to talk to them about it? If his parents are supportive, maybe they'd be receptive to online school too.
I wouldn't even know how to get in touch with them. My daughter sure wouldn't give me the details. She's very closed about that sort of thing. I don't even know his last name.
Maybe she could float the idea to him then?
That really sucks.
Maybe make up a reason for a party and get your kid to invite her friends. March break is coming up.
This is one of several reasons why I'm (secularly) homeschooling my kids.
It probably happens more often than you think. Without the nonbinary angle and excuse to invoke bathroom bills this wouldn't have got nearly the attention that it did. In the US, most bullying related deaths are suicide and a couple hundred thousand kids get physically attacked by fellow students every year in addition (most recent number I'd found was a few years old and around 288k). If you piece together the various statistics, an estimate of around 3500 kids per year dying to bullying-related suicide is probably reasonable. Bullying-related homicide is harder to get a decent number on, but it's probably significantly lower.
That they can say the autopsy showed CoD was not trauma from the attack but were awaiting toxicology and other ancillary results before naming an official CoD makes me curious if they suspect CoD is overdose and are waiting for results to confirm. I guess we'll see when the report is finished.
How's protecting those kids by putting them in danger going?
Oh - a kid you wanted to kill us dead - all part of the plan.
These lawmakers are knowingly lying for personal gain, and to kill those they don't like - including kids. They're fucking demons, and their supporters are either as bad, or mentally deficient.
This is so fucking sad
But for the creator of The Libs of Tiktok, it's a day to celebrate 🥂
Her name is Chaya Raichik and I'd prefer to call her by her name than her shitty internet bsname
And people know where she lives. They should do something about it
1: This whole system is ripe for honeypots
2: Do it yourself, pussy.
I'm not in her area, and all the doormat pussies say "do it yourself".
Oh, assassinated a fascist in your neighborhood, have you?
Feel free to brag about it here.
Sorry bro, not as clever as you think you are
I know, I'm even smarter.
I think this is a direct effect of Trump's behavior. It is ok now to openly celebrate the death of a teen. Also ok to openly follow someone who does this. There are so many people going confidently "yeah, i grab 'em by the pussy, so what?", it's really sickening.
No, it is not.
Trump's behavior and by extension theirs is the result of liberals not taking this shit seriously
Yes, also.
They didn't take it seriously, generally took too long to respond and when they responded, there were already 10 new things ( that were worse ) that had to be addressed.
In case everyone wasn’t aware, Ryan Walters hired Chaya/Libs of TikTok to check our libraries.
This is exactly the outcome they (republicans, the police, Elon Musk, etc.) want.
Pro-life, until they arent what expected, then fuck those people. The conservative religious are very hateful.
Hey now, they don't care about em after they're born! Especially it they are poor or not Christian & white enough.
https://youtu.be/84phU8of02U
They were 16, people that beat them up were "older girls". Surely they will charge them as adults right?
Nah they will just claim religious persecution and "it will ruin their life" throw in them "fearing for their safety" being the right race and gender. At most they are looking at community service.
I think the system is going to suddenly find a lot of excuses not to do that. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the police suddenly decided they had no place enforcing adult laws in school and saying this is a learning moment...
I mean, they're young girls and probably white so the justice system is going to do everything it can to avoid holding them accountable before you even get to it being a nonbinary victim in a red state. Even if they're charged and convicted as adults I'd be shocked if they get worse than probation and maybe a suspended sentence at worst. Names withheld by media, of course.
Conservatism is a plague of oppression, violence and death. It always has been. There is no place in a modern society for conservatism.
When you see your conservative neighbors, co-workers and relatives, remember they killed this innocent child. They did this.
Ancient Roman Conservatives (Optimates, cause of course) "Look when you lift their skirts, you find a Populare (Democrat). We need to bring back traditional values!"
Since the days of yore, always about traditional fucking values.
And like now they aren’t. It’s a factionalized past constructed by the traditionalists.
I'm not going to aggressively confront my simple conservative acquaintances as if they themselves did this, but I do think it's a moral obligation to root out and identify why our acquaintances support a regressive, fearful, and hateful brand of politics. Like any sale made, it has to be the customer's choice, or at least the illusion of choice. You'll never convert anyone to a more Leftist brand of looking at the world if your ideology seems aggressive or unhinged. We're trying to make conservatism look less ideal than leftism.
So true. There must be no forgiveness, no tolerance, no acceptance. Conservatives must be purged from this planet. This is the ONLY way forward, if we want a society that is good for everybody.
That is not at all what they are saying.
So? That's what I am saying. What are they saying in your opinion? To silently seethe at the conservatives while not doing anything?
You are mocking a call to violence in which there is none. They're saying conservatism (the belief, the ideology) needs to die.
Conservatives should be openly mocked and ridiculed for their cruelty and violence. They should be laughed out of office.
You are being entirely idealistic. You are saying things that sound nice to you without considering how realistic they are.
You cannot attack an ideology without attacking the people who make up that ideology. They cannot be cleanly distinguished from each other.
At some level you even realize this.
This means attacking the people. You are talking about making conservatives social pariahs, having them lose their livelihoods and power.
So yes, destroy conservatism, but if you don't have the stomach to do everything that simple statement entails, get out of my way.
Quit your bullshit. Dunking on shitty beliefs does not equate to killing or hurting people like you were suggesting.
Good job moving the goal posts. First it was purging. Now it's being made out to be social pariahs. Pick one, and quit equating scorn with violence.
No one hasn't mentioned violence except you. The word "attack" can mean many things.
You have a short memory
https://lemm.ee/comment/9485402
Did you just link to a comment I didn't make? The delusions of auth-left never ceases to amaze me.
Lemmy has shitty links, and yours got buried by downvotes. Read the third one down:
I'm not auth left. But thanks for the insult, it's nicer to know that I'm dealing with a literal child.
And does "purge" mean violence to you?
Yes, you are auth-left. Your views on personal liberty are authoritarian. I am a liberal, but that's all I am going to say about myself.
"Owasso police issued a subsequent statement on 21 February to say that an autopsy indicated that Nex had not died as a result of trauma." STFU
Ah yes. The totally normal spontaneous death of a 16 year old completely unrelated to the physical trauma suffered just before. You conservative apologists are always so fast to jump to conspiracy, why not now?
Reminds me of a bit from a web serial called Pale:
“I was in my rights to weaken him.”
“You shot the man in the head, you said,” Musser replied.
“It left him very weak, yes. He died shortly after.”
Mostly I wanted to tell you drama queen fucks to stfu bout blaming half a nation.
Not even close to half lmao
Enjoy the next Trump presidency.
Reactionaries be wildin
Do you understand anything people say to you or do you just twist the meaning and play dumb to score points in your own head?
Oh don't worry, I understand dog whistles very well 😋😋😋
No, you clearly don't. Enjoy the next 5 years.
@return2ozma Conservatives see this and applaud. This makes them happy. It puts a smile on their faces, but then they'll turn around and argue online that it's not about blind hate. They all know, deep down, that they're evil pieces of shit. They DO KNOW and perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to half convince themselves otherwise.
Every time they see the evil they're doing in the world this hypocritical dichotomy churns in their brains, and I hope on their deathbed they're consumed by it.
Yeah seriously. I thought they were pro life..?
Not pro-life, but anti-choice.
You'll notice this trend continues beyond the topic of women's health.
History will remember them the way we remember the racists who upheld Jim Crow in the American south.
Assuming that there will be history of course.
This makes me sick to my stomach. This poor person just wanted to be themselves. Fuck our society, time to start over
Fuck all of these Shitty Republican Christians for killing this child.
I hope every last one of these Republicans get jailed for this murder but we all know that no one will face any actual consequences for this fine example of Shitty Republican Christian love.
The Republicans must read a different Bible or maybe I read it wrong
They read a proper one, but completely ignore the parts they don't like and twist/exagerate the parts they like.
I wonder how they respond to concerns over them not looking after the environment or the poor/marginalised.
Those are in the part of the Bible that they are ignoring
All the panic from Right-Wing cultists has real danger for people. I’m so sorry that people failed Nex. I hope people will be held accountable.
Direct result of the bathroom laws and other transphobic policies because it emboldens the most fucked up to act out and think they can get away with it (as they probably will)
Teenage girls are psychotic, getting into fights with a trans kid and beating them to a pulp. How many psychotically violent teens are in schools?
All of them. Some are better at self control, but none of us were sane.
Seriously. How can anyone expect us to be when our skull meatballs were still congealing?
I’m sure every American here has stories. The only reason I and my friends were never bullied much was early on in 6th grade, I stuffed a jock into their locker.
The thing was he was trying to stuff a friend of mine in a locker; with his coach as hall monitor (“boys will be boys,”).
For the record the only thing that I could get to fit was his head and shoulders. Also, the fire dept was breaking out the jaws of life when the lunch lady showed up with bacon grease… so he spent the first ten or so minutes of every class trying to make shit up about that… while everyone knew.
Edit to clarify: this isn’t to detract how awful this is, and from trans hate. Just pointing out bullying in schools has been a thing since long before I was in school; and it’s gotten worse. Schools are underfunded, under staffed and over stuffed (with students.); and that’s entirely by design. If “normal” people have stories… I shudder to think of what that kid and other trans kids have to go through.
I find it hard to believe he got stuck that badly.
A lot. I may not have been aware that I was trans back when I was a kid but growing up became a very lonely existence once girls and boys isolated themselves into their little tribes. When the siloing process sticks you with a peer group that implicitly knows you to be an ill fit and even when you try to get along your brain doesn't register that gendered sense of "this is a person who acts and thinks like me" you don't as a habit really make very close friends.
Kids are very good at forming hardcore social bonds where they let their sense of individual identity slip in favor of their group. While I didn't experience trans hate growing up directly persay being placed in situations where you just can't make decent bonds tends to make you an easy target for being ripped to shreds as somebody else's exercise of building pack solidarity. It takes very little for children to find justification to be violent.
It is very disgusting to see.
This is exactly what the GOP wants. It's only going to embolden them to spread this horseshit.
Yeah… sounds like Oklahoma.
Just saw this morning that the police are saying the death was not caused by injuries from the fight.
https://nypost.com/2024/02/22/us-news/nonbinary-student-nex-benedicts-death-was-not-caused-by-injuries-from-school-fight-police/amp/
Just fyi, the new york post is as dogshit as fox news. If you're looking to get actual information, you're better off looking elsewhere.
Agreed. However Apnews is reporting it as well.
https://apnews.com/article/oklahoma-owasso-student-death-nonbinary-nex-04f1c51924860d77877016810bc05762
I wasn't commenting on that, just that the new york post means nothing. Regardless, I frankly don't give a shit what the police say; they're not exactly known for telling the truth.
Right, it's easy to just make up your mind about something (with no evidence), when everyone who is telling you otherwise can be labeled as nazis, pigs, murderers, or whatever the Current Thing happens to be 🤭
"I don't trust X" != "I've made up my mind"
What have you not made up your mind about?
I'm am not /u/HandBreadedTools. Go ask them.
Let's say the kid offed themself. Are we really going to pretend that the continued bullying and the school's inaction would have had nothing to do with that?
Conservative thinking killed this beautiful child. Every conservative is to blame.
Does this logic apply to crimes committed by immigrants?
"Immigrant thinking killed this beautiful child. Every immigrant is to blame."
Hmmmm, I'm not sure what immigrant ideology is, or where all the oppressive legislation that immigrants passed is, but I'm sure you can find a way to scapegoat people you hate.
You know the drill, just keep asking more and more absurd questions with confidence, and when someone says you are driving people to a hateful conclusion with loaded questions, you can just say "what, I can't ask questions anymore? What happened to free speech?"
If you make more stuff up, you can't paint me as Hitler
Immigrants don't as a group do everything in their political power to fuck people over...
Republicans and Conservatives do.
I think we should try to answer this rather than just down voting. I think the difference is that conservative thinking led to the policy that led to the person being targeted, and possibly also to a climate of intolerance that made the attacker/s feel like they had the support of the community to do that. We're not really talking about who is too blame for this individual instance (obviously that's the person/s who manslaughtered this child). We're talking bigger picture.
When an immigrant commits a crime, I suppose you would argue that liberal thinking created the situation where that could happen, but I think it's a false equivalence. Big picture immigrants don't disproportionately commit crime, and there are major benefits that come with immigration. While trans people absolutely are disproportionately the victims of violence, and there are no real benefits to transphobic policies.
I guess I haven't done great at this, please other people build on this reply, it just felt wrong to see a fair enough question just being downvoted with no reply.
Just a troll, downvote and move on
I mean that was possibly their intention, but nevertheless I think it is a reasonable question to ask, and I found it difficult to answer comprehensively.
If we dismiss everything like this as troll, and not worth thinking about, we miss an opportunity to develop point of view and add nuance to our arguments.
?????
Still waiting for the day people take this seriously. Maybe just a couple more decades to go :/
This has always been the intent.
the people who make the laws simply do not care about dead trans people. to them that is one step closer to the world they want.
Delusional fuckers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Of course not. Empowering women, poc and the LGBTQ+ community would actively hurt them being in power. So better to make laws to keep those groups at the bottom.
"dead trans people were going to vote for the other guys anyhow" - Republicans
This was always the plan!
Since head trauma was ruled out, I wonder what happened 💉
I wonder what happened to you.. 🤡
Should have been a Destiny fan, then this wouldn’t have happened. /s
Absolutely gross, disgusting, evil, impossible to reason with.
Unrelated: what kind of name is "Nex"?
What kind of names are Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Judas, Jesus? They are all just the sound of meat flapping around.
Historically established names which the populous, in near unanimity, decided are good and worth reusing. Call me old fashioned if you want, but I'd rather see yet another John than someone named mr. mxyzptlk
And I suppose allowing people to you use whatever bathrooms they want would end bullying?
They aren't using whatever bathrooms they want. They are using the bathroom that people of their gender are supposed to use.
But do explain to us why you want this man to be in a women's bathroom. Or locker room.
That is Ben Melzer. He is a male model. He was also born biologically female.
Do you think women would feel comfortable or safe with him in there?
It could definitely remove one of the most notorious and dangerous places kids get bullied.
Just because you want to be a peeping Tom and watch folks in the bathroom doesn't mean everyone else does.
Really? Please explain how that wouldn't make them 10x more likely to be bullied. I'll wait.
Ah yeah, prove your point with personal insults, that's convincing.
What's your proposal, then?
Considering they think being trans is a choice, I think you can guess what their proposal is.
Considering this person thinks being trans means you are whatever gender you look like I think you can guess they're a TERF.
Oh I know they're a TERF.
I don't think anyone is saying changing bathrooms will end bullying. Judging by the conversation I'm seeing I think most people are upset that a child in a government institution was physically beaten to death.
Although based on your comment it doesn't seem like you're on the same page as those people.
Top voted comment is
Weird cuz there's an entire sentence in the headline of this article that mentions banning bathrooms. What do you think they were implying by that?
E: Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Lots of downvoters and no answers.
This whole post and all its threads are a ducking train wreck.
Anyway... Looking beyond the headline "Oklahoma governor Kevin Stitt signed a bill that required public school students to use bathrooms that matched the sex listed on their birth certificates."
I think that's fucked because it others trans people and sends the message that hating trans people is ok. And I think that makes assholes more likely to be violent towards trans people.
And also a trans kid in this was beaten to death, and might have survived had the school called a goddamn ambulance, or if they had done anything to counter anti-trans hate.
Idk what the duck do you want to hear exactly?
That we should force trans kids to use the bathroom of their birth certificate sex? Or that we shouldn't?
Maybe instead of dancing around with questions just state your opinion?
I want to hear exactly what I asked for. That the author is dishonestly blaming this senseless death on bathroom laws. That they're rage-baiting to feed the machine that stifles any sort of progress.
I want to hear an actual answer to the questions I ask instead of deflection.
I want you to acknowledge disinformation, even when it comes from "your side".
No, but I don't see why that's a reason not to allow people to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity. Do you have an actual argument you wanted to make, or are you just asking stupid questions?
The title of this article is very obviously suggesting that someone died as a direct result of bathroom laws.
When the state shows solidarity with anti-trans bigots it emboldens those bigots to act out.
Anyway your comment distracts from the real issue.
Some people hate trans people enough to kill them just for existing. That is patently wrong, outrageous, disgusting, immoral, sickening, and horrific.
If I see anyone insulting, injuring, or harassing a person with bigoted insults, I will be compelled to do something to stop it. I'm fucking sick to death of fucking nazis acting with impunity. They need to creep back into the sewers where they came from and STFU.
There are several issues. The fact that you deflect and refuse to acknowledge one for the other just proves that I'm right.
What is the issue they’re trying to deflect?
Scroll up
You haven't complained about any "issue". You're just asking questions and speaking vaguely. What is your point?
I've been extremely specific about my concern. If you want to cover your eyes and pretend you can't see it, that's not something I can help you with. Goodbye.
Your argument has basically been "anti-trans bathroom rules didn't actually kill this child, so I don't care that this child is dead", and you're getting downvoted because that's a disgusting stance for anyone to take. Everyone can plainly see that transphobia motivated these bathroom rules, as well as the attack that lead to a dead child.
While everyone else rightfully condemns hate, you're in here spewing it. Now make good on your "goodbye" and go the fuck away.
No, you're just lying. I never said anything that remotely resembled that statement.
Trans kid was murdered. Any decent human being considers that the main issue.
The kid wasn't killed directly because of the laws but because of anti-trans hate. Bathroom laws only foment that hate.
It is the main issue. That doesn't mean all other issues suddenly cease to exist.
They weren't killed at all because of the laws, which the title of this article is obviously implying.
Why does no one cares that the author is intentionally spreading disinformation?
"The bullying had started in earnest at the beginning of the 2023 school year, a few months after Oklahoma governor Kevin Stitt signed a bill that required public school students to use bathrooms that matched the sex listed on their birth certificates."
Nex was assaulted in the bathroom. The article doesn't go into detail, but based on context, Nex outwardly appeared like a boy, but was forced the use the girls bathroom. Laws that don't specifically call for inequality can still be used to harass very targeted and specific group. This is why getting rid of ridiculous bathroom bills is important, and this is why Republicans push so hard to implement them. It's not about creating safer environment for most people, but about creating a very obvious, uncomfortable, and unsafe environment for a very specific group of people, in this case, transgender and non-binary people.
Okay? I supposed if they used the boys' bathroom they would have been fine? Because teenage boys are known for their kind nature and never physically bully anyone? And they totally wouldn't have been even more susceptible to bullying?
And I suppose teenage boys would never abuse this new law to be granted access and harass girls in the girls' bathroom?
Again, this is speculation. I think the article correctly refuses to identify Nex's apparent and "legal" gender.
Yes, probably. The 3 older girls probably would not have assaulted Nex in the boys bathroom.
Empty rhetorical question with no relevancy to the problem at hand.
More empty rehtoric. Disregarding.
Mostly empty rhetoric here, but the data does not support the argument that boys are temporarily claiming to be girls so they can hang out in the girls bathroom. It's not like there is some kind of physical barrier preventing people of the incorrect gender from entering a bathroom, you can just walk right in. If a woman goes into the women's bathroom, and peeps on other women who are just trying to shit in peace, she would get reported, and should suffer the same consequences as man that goes in the women's bathroom to peep.
...what is?
LOL you're intentionally reframing the question and ignoring the new potential issue you know exists, and examining the situation with a pinhole POV. You're obviously not interested in an honest discussion.
LOL of course it's relevant. Your assertion (and the author's) is that Nex would have somehow been safer in a boys' bathroom, because of their physical appearance. As if boys are somehow less likely to beat on a trans kid.
Why am I not surprised that you're "disregarding" pressing questions about your narrative.
Right, and what "data" supports the idea that genderless bathrooms are safer for trans people?
We are speculating on Nex's apparent and "legal" gender. We are speculating on the situation under which the assault occured, since there aren't concrete facts available due to (most likely) representation and privacy concerns for Nex.
Whether or not Nex would have been assaulted or bullied in the boys restroom is a pointless deviation from your original question that I answered. Roughly paraphrased to "What does this assault have to do with bathroom laws in the US" Nex was, based on the context, mostly likely assaulted and bullied due to a law forcing them to use a bathroom that did not match their apparent gender. Yes, the assault could have occured in the boys restroom, but it didn't. We can't focus on what could have happened in the other restroom because then we bring in to question whether or not the assault could have happened anywhere, like the cafeteria, hallways, classroom, etc... its an empty unrelated argument to say that assault could have happen somewhere else. That is why I am disregarding those statements.
You must have misunderstood the statement. My point is that men are not claiming to be women in order to circumvent bathroom privacy and peep on people taking a shit, and if they did, they would suffer the same legal consequences as a woman peeping on other women in the bathroom.
What fucking business is it of yours? I mean, really. You wanna do dick checks of everyone using a public bathroom? Go the fuck ahead, I dare you.
It's as much my fucking business as it is the author's, yours, OP's, or any of the fucking people commenting here.
That's fucking disgusting and fucking inappropriate, why the fuck would I do ever fucking do that?