U-Penn women swimmers had to undress next to '6-foot-4 biological male' Lia Thomas '18 times a week'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ained-Congress-hears-bombshell-testimony.html

You're just thinking wrong of course and with enough "reeducation" you will think as we tell you to think. These folks that run these types of institutions can't hide their authoritarian impulses.

Only 18 times per week so I guess that makes it the exception and not the rule right?

They weren't erasing women. They were just erasing their agency, their opportunities, their feelings, and their desires. The problem was women and their biology, not the university, trans advocacy and their ideology. They couldn't have it more backwards if they tried.

This is common in this day and age. The people who want the control will insist that no one speaks against their claims while disqualifying, censoring and doing everything possible to remove while never addressing or confronting the counterclaims. It's because they can't address them. They lose to them. They'll scream you didn't understand their point or you're too ignorant to understand their point. it's why you need "reeducation" about their point.

No. They're wrong. These people testifying are doing us all a great service. They are showing how the trans advocates, and the authoritarians work and the damage they are doing. Applause to them for fighting and speaking out.

 

Democrats and their absolutes. As soon as they determined transgenders have the moral absolute high ground then there’s nothing they can do that Democrats won’t defend. They can rape women, they can beat them at sports, they can drag queen it up in front of children, they can even shoot up schools, and absolutely none of it will be condemned, only swept under the rug better than a gaggle of priests over a little boy.

 

Lots of GOP people are putting in their support on a dude who bragged about sexual assaulting women, and subsequently lost a court case about it worth millions. He is known to barge into locker room where minors were undresses to have a look. Epstein was a good buddy of him, according to himself. And he payed a prostitute, lavishly, when he impregnated his ex-porn start / nude model of a wife. She's an immigrant even. Real asset.

"moral high ground".... yeah. lol
Where the Dems do condemn those who breach the law but only those who breach it, the GOP are looking the other way when the stain does it.

 

Lets play along and say the highlighted part is true, what does that have to do with THIS issue? I'll never understand liberal "logic".
There are plenty of people on BOTH sides that for VERY OBVIOUS reasons don't think MEN in a WOMENS sport is a good idea
Try staying on topic eh?

 

The previous poster tossed in how dems think transgenders got the moral high ground and so apparently they defend them even when they rape women and shoot up schools. And last time I checked, that is total nonsense. So I gave that poster a reply about the moral high ground the GOP give to the stain, no matter what he does. Bit weird you don't understand the logic. I also dunno why you single me out on this of topic thing.

Indeed. I do think a lot more people of the GOP turn their back to science and think women and men are not created equal and so have different competitions, while there is also a fanatic hate against transgenders because their bible teaches that hate. This falls under their ambrella of not wanting to be "woke". While at the dem side it's more about science, and if a transgender male can be physically transformed with medication etc so it can compete with women in a fair way. I do believe the latest idea of the Olympic committee that it's a no, where it previously was a yes.

 

If you must...
The Olympic committee basically doesn't allow it
https://apnews.com/article/transgen...verning-body-c17e99d3121fa964336458b57ae266f7


I'm guessing the US congress is rather slow that this is it.

 

So my claim that Democrats use moral absolutes and ignore resulting immoralities is somehow countered by what republicans do in your mind.

Whataboutism doesn’t counter anything. What Republicans do and are has zero to do with what Democrats do and are.

But hey, I guess when Democrats are all about laws being broken as they let in illegals by the millions, let their mobs rob and riot and burn at will and make sure to let out criminals on no bail laws, it’s really hard to defend the absolutism arguments used to justify that stupidity so you have to run to the “oh yeah well republicans did this horrible terrible thing so Democrats letting dicks swing in front of little girls is now super cool!”

What hilarious absurdity

 

I don't recall the left being supporting of rape or a shoot out. But there is you with your falacy's.

But hypocrisy does. You go vote on your sexual predator, thinking that'll solve problems about sexual misconduct. lol

 

then you don’t have much of a memory, or is the definition of support to you only one in which is verbal?

let me educate you: policies supporting crime are support. Lack of policies stopping crime is support. Covering up for crimes is support.

We literally have school staff engaged in covering up transgenders raping girls in bathrooms and you think because they don’t say “we love rape” that they don’t support it. LOL.

at some point in all this, you really need to start using some basic logic.

nice strawman fallacy. Bet you think you’re real tough against those. So, once again, a liberal accuses others of what he himself is guilty of. What else is new?

 

Please source where the Dems support rape and shoot outs. That was your initial claim.

Hypocrisy isn't a strawman. You say the Dems support rape. Well, the GOP main candidate is somebody who was made pay millions because he lost the sexual assault case. Fact.

 

Lol I blow up your argument that only verbal support of rape and crime counts and what do you do? “I need sourced quotes of Democrats verbally supporting rape and crime”.

Sorry, your logical fallacy is just that. Fallacious.

How about you start sourcing where Democrats are cracking down on criminals. I’ll even help! There’s great stories of transgender men allowed into women’s prisons where they are raping and impregnating them. Is that what you call cracking down on criminals? That’ll teach women not to commit crimes!

You don’t like my claim of systemic Democrat pandering and support of crime and criminals? Show me how tough they are on em!

my guess is you’ll just keep sticking to your fallacies though.

looks like you don’t know what a strawman is anymore than you know what support qualifies as.

 

You started this saying Dems support rape or shootouts. But you can not be arsed to source this is actually happened.
What can I make of this.

Looks like you're just calling things a strawman for the sake to avoid dealing it's hypocritical, which it is.

 

wrong, my initial claim was Democrats love absolutes and will not condemn but rather sweep under the rug all the immoralities that happen as a result.

That is my claim. The support thing was your little twist and my response to that is support does not have to be verbal whatsoever. Democrats actively support crime and rape in many many ways. I referenced some of them and all you do is ignore it.

So what am I to make of a poster who doesn’t rely on logic to make his arguments? Answer: nothing, because he doesn’t matter anymore than his arguments do.

It’s actually funny, you set up a strawman to knock down my strawman claim. The reason I said you put up a strawman had nothing to do with the reason you said it, you just made up the reason to knock it down.

lol. I was right, you really do think you’re tough on strawmen

 

You wrote "They can rape women, they can beat them at sports, they can drag queen it up in front of children, they can even shoot up schools, and absolutely none of it will be condemned"
I asked you to source this nonsense, and I can only judge now that you're refusing. Apparently no such thing ever happened.

Just because you label it as a strawman, doesn't make it so. You're being hypocritical.
See that I care you vote on a person who sexually assaulted somebody, while baselessly claiming that the dems support rape without being able to prove.

It's good for a good laugh though.

 

By the way, I’d like you to start sourcing your beliefs:

why is support to you only definable by verbal support and any other form doesn’t count or exist? Source this

and then after you do that, explain why republicans not verbally supporting rape still means they support rape because they support a rapist for candidate.

^^ this is why I say you are illogical. And your hypocrisy needs to be explained.

Democrats: support for rape only counts if it’s verbal

Republicans: support for rape counts if they support a rapist for office. Verbally supporting it is magically no longer necessary


^^ logic fail

 

.

Lol what? Transgenders aren’t raping women in bathrooms and prisons? Yes they are. And Democrats and their policies are allowing it to happen.

go educate yourself. I am not your professor of basic facts. Start paying me if you want me to be.

ha you just did it again. Since you don’t know what a strawman is I’ll even point it out for you to make it easier: “See that I care you vote on a person who sexually assaulted someone”

^^ you just lied about me claiming you know how I vote in order to advance your argument. That is a strawman. It is because it’s a logical fallacy in the same manner as a strawman fallacy is defined by the dictionary.

Oh dang here I am acting as your professor and I’m not getting paid! Silly me!

 

I asked you to source your claim first.
And you're defaulting.

 

You're still not sourcing that they do not condemn this.
And so you're defaulting.

The so called "strawman" is that people like you support a person who pays millions in damages over a sexual assault, while invent without proving the dems do not condemn rape.

 

You act like if a source is asked for then it’s required. Who asks who first is 5 year old stuff. You believe what you believe and you started this conversation with me begging for sources based on faulty logic then pony the F up buddy

 

Lol you’re dying on the altar of sourcing based on faulty logic.

I disagree with your faulty logic. Why would I source anything when the reasons you want it are based on faulty hypocritical logic?? And every time I point out the logic you just go durrrr I need source durrrr

 

You're not sourcing your claim, so you're just replying but also defaulting on your claim.
I can only judge that your claim about the Dem is far right wing fake news.

 

Oh so a strawman is only a strawman if you say it is and now I default on my claim if you say so too.

must be nice to live in your world of liberal absolutism. Thanks for demonstrating my point.

I will reiterate: liberals love their absolutes and will refuse to condemn and push under the rug any immorality that results from it.

You have not disproven that claim or even given a valid rationale against it. Countless examples including Democrats loving illegal immigration and transgender ideology and criminal just reform and virtually nothing whatsoever about them doing anything about the drugs, rapes and crime that result from them. My opinion is firmly established with any basic web search

Yours is just blowing right back up your ass where you can shove your whataboutism and strawmen with it

 

I actually explained how it is hypocrisy , and you're not responding to that. That's on you. The "Oh so a strawman is only a strawman if you say it is" fits your shoe.

 

you haven’t explained anything. You haven’t used logic, reason, sourcing, or anything else to validate your opinion. Yours is merely the argumentative denial and fallacy riddled language of a typical bridge troll.

 

Its odd that they have to undress 5 times a day, but it is what it is.