(March 29, 2017 at 6:27 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 6:23 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: His terrible non-argument is only there to mask his transphobia and bigoted right-wingedness asshat attitude.

---

I doubt we could describe morons like him doing anything called 'thinking'.

More like 'having thoughts that are stupid'.

Ad-hominem! Learn to think and stop using so many logical fallacies.

That isn't the Ad-Hominem fallacy as I made no logical argument whatsoever, whether valid or invalid, moron.

We've already seen your complete lack of knowledge of logical fallacies and your embarrassingly Wikipedia-level understanding of logical fallacies on another thread where you were pissed off about people who called you out on logical fallacies. Don't embarrass yourself doubly by even thinking for a second that I don't actually understand them unlike yourself.

---

(March 29, 2017 at 6:27 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 6:26 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: So you're transphobic for the same reason as someone wanting to ban black people from sports is racist.

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm not transphobic, I just recognize obvious reality here. Black people have 99.9% of the same genetic material as everyone else. In fact the advantage they have in sports is probably as much about culture as anything. There is more variation between the various 'races' as there is within them. Trans people don't even share the same chromosomes as those they want to compete with. It's so totally different. To say that Fallon Fox:


Should not be beating up on girls isn't transphobic, it's a statement of science.

I notice how you didn't even address my actual argument when I actually DID make one here.

(March 29, 2017 at 6:34 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 6:27 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Ad-hominem! Learn to think and stop using so many logical fallacies.

That isn't the Ad-Hominem fallacy as I made no logical argument whatsoever, whether valid or invalid, moron.

We've already seen your complete lack of knowledge of logical fallacies and your embarrassingly Wikipedia-level understanding of logical fallacies on another thread where you were pissed off about people who called you out on logical fallacies. Don't embarrass yourself doubly by even thinking for a second that I don't actually understand them unlike yourself.

Lol, you mean the one where you couldn't even correctly say what a strawman was? Every argument you get into is a bunch of logical fallacies and ignoring of points. When you can't address a point, like the obvious advantage of being trans is a combat sport, where people's health and safety is at risk, you just start insulting. Saying that you can ignore my points because of so and so insult is the very definition of a Ad-hominem. So good job on doing it a second time. I thought that you said you liked to have your shitty logic pointed out to you because it helps you become a better person. Really you just seem super butthurt.

But either way, you are welcome.

(March 29, 2017 at 6:19 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Nothing is ever a choice... especially identity.

Rachel Dolezal...

nuff said.

(March 29, 2017 at 6:47 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 6:19 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Nothing is ever a choice... especially identity.

Rachel Dolezal...

nuff said.

I voted no. This isn't about PC, it's about fairness. Men are physically stronger than women, that's just a fact. Regardless of someone identifying as a women and doing surgery and taking hormones, they're still going to have a male advantage over the other girls. There's a reason why they have men's sports and women's sports played separately. Otherwise we'd all just be in the same games/races.

(March 29, 2017 at 6:39 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Lol, you mean the one where you couldn't even correctly say what a strawman was?

No... I meant the one where you couldn't get any of the fallacies right, said your logic is "perfect" and embarassed yourself with your poor logic, poor knowledge of logical fallacies, your high regard for the Wikipedia articles on logical fallacies (certainly not the best source...) and the fact you were making a thread about how super butthurt you were whenever other people point out your logical fallacies.

And how you didn't understand that logical fallacies ARE important to formal debates.

Quote: Every argument you get into is a bunch of logical fallacies and ignoring of points.

You can't even define or recognize logical fallacies so it's no surprise you think 'every argument' I get into is a 'bunch of logical fallacies' when actually my logic is very good and I am usually the one pointing out the fallacies and when someone does accuse me of a fallacy it tends to result in me correcting them and explaining to them why it's a misapplication (most commonly the NTS fallacy which is very commonly understood... or people assuming you're making an argument from ignorance even when you're not... and people conflating biases with logical fallacies when they're not the same thing).

And I can ignore as many points as I want. I tend to ignore the illogical stupid shit when I'm tired of it sometimes. I only focus on it when it's fun to do so... because otherwise pointing out the stupid shit would get kind of boring if it wasn't fun.

Quote:When you can't address a point, like the obvious advantage of being trans is a combat sport, where people's health and safety is at risk, you just start insulting.

I can't address a point? You're the one who ignored me when I actually DID make an argument and when I told you about the thread where you embarassed yourself with your poor logical fallacies you responded by asking me if I meant the one when I misdefined a strawman fallacy... which I didn't do but even if I did it's still a case of you not denying your embarassing yourself with your terrible understanding of logical fallacies all over that thread.

I would tell you to read up on logical fallacies but you already have done... but you're clearly not smart enough to understand logical validity properly.

I am not calling you a moron because I can't deal with your argument. I don't have to deal with an argument that doesn't exist. You didn't make an argument you asserted bigotry... I made an argument as to why it was bigoted and you ignored it.

Quote:Saying that you can ignore my points because of so and so insult is the very definition of a Ad-hominem.

1. I didn't say that.

2. That's not the definition of an Ad-Hom. I'd have to say that your argument was false because you're an idiot. Saying I can ignore your points because you're an idiot is not an Ad-Hom. Whether I can choose to ignore your points or not is not relevant.

Quote: So good job on doing it a second time. I thought that you said you liked to have your shitty logic pointed out to you because it helps you become a better person. Really you just seem super butthurt.

But either way, you are welcome.

You ignored the one time I actually used logic. You don't even understand what logical argumentation is. What logic of mine are your criticising? All you seem to be doing is saying I'm making a fallacy I never made... and ignoring the argument I actually did make.

(March 29, 2017 at 6:12 pm)Jesster Wrote: From the perspective of a transgender person, it gets awfully tiresome hearing people argue all the time about whether you should have certain rights or not. I still understand how it may look to you since you don't feel the same pressure. Feel free to discuss, but don't expect many transgender people to feel too overjoyed about it.

I'm a woman. It's not like people don't endlessly debate my capabilities.

(March 29, 2017 at 9:07 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 6:12 pm)Jesster Wrote: From the perspective of a transgender person, it gets awfully tiresome hearing people argue all the time about whether you should have certain rights or not. I still understand how it may look to you since you don't feel the same pressure. Feel free to discuss, but don't expect many transgender people to feel too overjoyed about it.

I'm a woman. It's not like people don't endlessly debate my capabilities.

I think you have extraordinary capabilities. BTW, Jester also. Those capabilities may be different depending on perspective.

(March 29, 2017 at 9:07 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 6:12 pm)Jesster Wrote: From the perspective of a transgender person, it gets awfully tiresome hearing people argue all the time about whether you should have certain rights or not. I still understand how it may look to you since you don't feel the same pressure. Feel free to discuss, but don't expect many transgender people to feel too overjoyed about it.

I'm a woman. It's not like people don't endlessly debate my capabilities.

Fair enough. I guess I just expected some empathy, but that's just me projecting again.

(March 29, 2017 at 11:55 pm)Jesster Wrote:

(March 29, 2017 at 9:07 pm)Shell B Wrote: I'm a woman. It's not like people don't endlessly debate my capabilities.

Fair enough. I guess I just expected some empathy, but that's just me projecting again.

Who said I don't empathize? I do. I'm not going to stop talking because of it.

It's not fun to have people chitchatting about what you can and can't do, but this is a logical conversation to have, particularly if it's possible that someone gets injured. Sometimes, I put my feelings aside and talk about whether women should be Navy SEALS or whether men are suited to child care. If the conversation hurts you, don't have it. It's a bit of an overreach to expect other people not to have it as well. My participation is not some way to be heartless to the trans community. It's an exercise in curiosity and conversation. Not everything is an attack or something to take personal offense to.

As for the idea being tossed out that people who might think being trans might be an advantage in sports under certain circumstances are transphobic, slow your roll. There is no logical leap from one to the other.