(April 17, 2016 at 4:58 pm)paulpablo Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 4:04 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Do you have any proof of that?  That transgender people are more likely to be attacked in restrooms.

?

Do YOU have any proof they don't????????????

(April 17, 2016 at 4:58 pm)paulpablo Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 4:04 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Do you have any proof of that?  That transgender people are more likely to be attacked in restrooms.

?

You really wanna go there? Sure you want, since it's business as usual with you.

It's easy. Google anti LGBT attacks in the language of your choosing and you will be served. Well, unless you want to confine your search to attacks in bathrooms, which may require a bit more searching. Pages upon pages. Too many to quote them here. But I'm sure, a big boy can do his own homework.

(April 17, 2016 at 3:46 pm)Expired Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 3:20 pm)abaris Wrote: One might wonder why you feel the need to be part of it then. Just saying.

I don't. Just saying.

Buh bye. Just saying.

(April 17, 2016 at 5:25 pm)Expired Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 4:58 pm)paulpablo Wrote: ?

Do YOU have any proof they don't????????????

Is that really your argument ?



i'm not taking any sides though.

(April 17, 2016 at 5:25 pm)Expired Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 4:58 pm)paulpablo Wrote: ?

Do YOU have any proof they don't????????????

No, I think they (transexuals) may have a higher tenancy of being verbally attacked, less chance of being raped, there's different forms of attacks.  But I didn't make any positive claims.  I said I think women would be more likely to be attacked but I used too broad of a word when talking about being attacked.  I was thinking of sex related attacks or intrusions.

To me it just looks like a lot of positive certain claims are being thrown around and some seemingly contradict other definite claims.  But I suppose it's just nitpicking.

(April 17, 2016 at 5:49 pm)paulpablo Wrote: No, I think they (transexuals) may have a higher tenancy of being verbally attacked, less chance of being raped, there's different forms of attacks.  But I didn't make any positive claims.  I said I think women would be more likely to be attacked but I used too broad of a word when talking about being attacked.  I was thinking of sex related attacks or intrusions.

Want to do a google or not? Think is basically talking out of the ass. If you choose not following the news, fine, that's where the internet kicks in, if one is inclined to do some - I wouldn't even call it research, since you can't help finding tons of results when looking for anti LGBT attacks.

(April 17, 2016 at 5:49 pm)paulpablo Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 5:25 pm)Expired Wrote: Do YOU have any proof they don't????????????

No, I think they (transexuals) may have a higher tenancy of being verbally attacked, less chance of being raped, there's different forms of attacks.  But I didn't make any positive claims.  I said I think women would be more likely to be attacked but I used too broad of a word when talking about being attacked.  I was thinking of sex related attacks or intrusions.

To me it just looks like a lot of positive certain claims are being thrown around and some seemingly contradict other definite claims.  But I suppose it's just nitpicking.

Are you serious? Transpeople have less chance of being raped in a public restroom??
Public restrooms are not notorious rape places. But now I'm going to be forced to look up cases of rape in public restrooms to be sure.

I have never ever read a news article about a cis woman being attacked in a public restroom. I have read about transmen and transwoman being attacked and physically and sexually assaulted in restrooms. I can't find any reputable stats though so I'm going to have to try to google every attack and do my own math. I'll get back to you on this.

(April 17, 2016 at 5:48 pm)Losty Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 3:46 pm)Expired Wrote: I don't. Just saying.

Buh bye. Just saying.

Yeah bye

(April 17, 2016 at 3:18 pm)Expired Wrote:

(April 15, 2016 at 4:41 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Easy there, tiger.

She doesn't "back" the church, she's a member of the church. You need not respect her beliefs (no one need respect anyone's belief, contrary to popular assertion), but you should respect her.

That was way, way, way over the line. C_L is a respected member of this community.

And you are?

Respect is earned Tiger, I can not and will not respect anybody who gives credence to such an organization. And btw stick your community up your arses.

Thank you for making my point. C_L has earned our respect through the kindness of her heart, her willingness to get to know us as people instead of just "the opposition", and her willingness to reconsider her position (sometimes-- she doesn't always agree, of course). 

You, on the other hand, have come in here as a Nobody and attacked someone who has already earned our respect. When it was pointed out to you that you're new and you're attacking a person who has earned respect from everyone else here, you chose to double down and attack all of us.

As my Drill Instructor once pointed out, "Son, if everyone else seems to be marching out of step, it's probably you."

(April 17, 2016 at 5:49 pm)Marsellus Wallace Wrote:

(April 17, 2016 at 5:25 pm)Expired Wrote: Do YOU have any proof they don't????????????

Is that really your argument ?



i'm not taking any sides though.

I hope you're comfortable on the fence.