Kaitlyn

We're both making positive cases that have burden of proof. I'm arguing that transgenderism is a mental illness.

Do you think being gay is a mental illness?

And how would you know this?

deductive reasoning 

with a big butt

and a best friend that runs on batteries 

I can't really call what I do "work" since I love it so much. 

masturbating isn’t a job you jackass.

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780230341821/racebaiterhowthemediawieldsdangerouswordstodivideanation

https://www.npr.org/2012/11/01/164115452/race-baiter-media-feeds-on-fear-and-prejudice

^^

Race-Baiter: How the Media Wields Dangerous Words to Divide a Nation

Author: Eric Deggans

https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/544588-race-baiting-medias-rush-to-motive-after-mass-shootings-is/amp/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/medias-racial-narrative-targets-whites-harms-blacks-11618597161

Ben Shapiro explains more on this media disinformation campaign : https://youtube.com/shorts/lOjGSHvwmEM?feature=share regarding the Allen Mall shooting and others committed by blacks that don’t get equal media attention. 

I'm making the point that the American media should be informing the American public, rather than stirring up race riots with distorted reporting. Do you not agree with that? Do you think legacy media should continue to heavily distort reporting?

• Your failure to comprehend your own sources'  central argument is the problem here.  I can't force you to be less bigoted and sideblinded in your information than you are.
  
• Here is how YOUR SOURCE explained the 11-21 times reporting:
  
• This latest piece https://twitter.com/DavidRozado/status/1643798767781683201?s=20… actually reminds me of how astonished I was when seeing how much news coverage black police shooting victims receive in other countries/regions of the world--from Afghanistan and Myanmar to Somalia, Vietnam, and Poland. Everywhere.
  
• But social media is a game changer.  And clickbait content sells and travels everywhere.  I also suspect media in some countries likes to highlight this stuff to distract from their own internal issues ('see how racist and creul life is in the US?')
  
• And Goldberg's source goes on to clarifiy:
  
• No evidence it started in US media. Analysis of 98 million news articles across 36 countries quantifies. Exception: state-controlled media from China/Russia/Iran using wokeness terminology to criticize/mock the West
  

• Let's agree that your research ability  is not to be trusted on this site.  But then I already knew that based on the corruption of your conclusions
  

It's not integral to the argument you're making here, but just shows that you don't have anything to back the claim you're making.

It’s not my claim we’re discussing here, it’s yours. I never came on here claiming transgender people are not mentally ill, I am refuting your claim that they are as insufficient. You need to understand how the burden of proof works.

(2) Transgender people who self-report not experiencing discrimination still have these elevated risks of suicide Suicidality-Transgender-Sep-2019.pdf (ucla.edu)

(3) Suicidal transgender people also typically don't cite bullying as a reason for their attempts at suicide

Once again, you’re searching for the one drop that’s going to fill up the whole bucket, then arguing that if none of them accomplished it it’s proof there’s no water.

No one thing is going to account for the entire gap between trans and cisgender suicide rates.

If you want to prove transgenderism is a mental illness you need certain controls in place to ensure your results are definitive. None of your studies have done this because that’s not even the topic they are studying. This is why nearly every single one you’ve cited ends with a disclaimer saying “more research is needed”.

Do I really need to explain to you why anecdotal evidence and "common sense" doesn't cut it compared to studies?

No, you need to explain how studies that aren’t studying the topic you’re asserting, who don’t agree with your conclusions, and who haven’t ruled out all alternative explanations proves your explanation to be the correct one.

So, the left-wing solutions to transgenderism, at least in those regards, doesn't help the transgender condition in any significant way.

And yet you aren’t pretending to have nor are even seeking a solution to this problem, so your attack on “left wing solutions” (an absurd term here) rings quite hollow, especially as you sit here arguing these people are mentally ill and their own decisions regarding their own identity should be disregarded, because that’s really going to help people recover from suicidal thoughts…

Whoa, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that the American media exists solely for foreign people to read. It's not like you'd want to it keep the American people informed of what is going on in their country! It's much better to distort police on Black violence to the point wherein Black people think they need to riot against police brutality!

• That is not what your source reported.  Did you read your source?
  

The poll's data was released in 2019. 

• So now we have two falsehoods and one quite stupid misreading.  
  
• Skeptics CUPES polling was done September/Octobober 2020- it's right there in the first line
  
• CUPES-007 was published was published Feb 20, 2020
  

 Even if it wasn't...

• WTF?  You don't know for certain?
  

But how do you explain it? How do you explain the American public's highly delusional view 

• Maybe most Americans are nearly as lazy and prejudiced as you are about finding their facts.   Let's assume the avg. American tried no harder than you did to come to a conclusion, the difference being they didn't lie about researching thier opinion the way you have done.
  

Weird that you call the media "lying" but you failed to report a single untruth told by media.

• Goldberg himself explains the over-reporting of unarmed blacks:  foreign interest.  Most foreign countries don't find police shooting of white people interesting enough to print but any shooting of unarmed black people makes America look racist and every country likes to read about how racist America is.
  

The only inaccuracy in this OP is you moving the Skeptic poll from Sept 2020 to 2019 

• I don't think Americans exagerrated sense of police threat to black people can be blamed on foreign interest.
  

Depending on the database you use, the correct response ranges from 13-27 -- well over half the respondents were completely wrong, and something like a third were magnitudes of levels wrong.

The majority of those were legally justified. 

Media lies? What a surprise there.

Who would have thought that choosing which facts to say and which facts to hide can lead viewers to wrong conclusions!

You need to show that overall, "increasing life" leads to a positive outcome.

No. Increasing life is a positive outcome, since I hold value that life is the most important thing.

In other words, humans experience far more negative emotion with one unit of pain than they do positive emotion with one unit of pleasure. That's his point

It still stands that most people dont trade 1 unit of pleasure for 1 unit of pain. I am guessing the actual ratio is 100000:1.

Negroes? You stupid cracker. 

What do you mean by increasing life?

I think that above all, we should work to increase the amount of human life to the maximum possible.

I agree that reducing pain is good, but it is not more important than increasing life.

Which part is he exaggerating?

"would you trade five minutes of the worst pain imaginable for five minutes of the greatest pleasure?"

Humanity does not have to make such trade in order to exist, so yes it is exaggerated.

• Mexican is not a skin color
  

No kidding. It’s their nationality. Hispanic (Latino) is their heritage.

• 50% of Mexicans are white
  

No, they are not. To be white is to be Caucasian. Mexicans =/= Caucasians. What you are referring to is purely skin color.

• 80% of Hispanics in the US are white
  

Hispanics/Latinos =/= Caucasians. What you are referring to is purely skin color.

• 80% of Hispanics in the US are white
  

I guess someone needs to tell him that increasing life>reducing pain

most people disagree with him about the amount of pain in life

that he obviously exaggerated to the fullest extent.

Though I would suggest that racial tribalism as you refer to it is not instinctive. Only the indicators of perceivable difference are innate.

Thought patterns result from post natal  conditioning of the mind, whereby we are taught to be racially tribal.

A new style of formative conditioning and data acquisition could easily change thought patterns.

Hola mi amore :)

I'm sorry but there are a lot of men who are simply too unattractive to be worth considering.

I wouldnt know how is that measured. Like, what does a woman find attractive in a man other than his wallet?

women are fine with going back to harems and sharing a top 10% man

Yes. That would be fun and they will do that once polygamy becomes widely accepted.

The reasoning will probably go like:

"Why should women compete for a man when they can share him and everyone is happy then!".

This is an immigrant or a jogger doing the shooting no doubt.

100% of women only want 10% of men.

Sadly for them, that ratio wouldnt work because leaving 90% of men virgin is a very bad idea.

If we say that:

"women walking around half-naked = increase in rape"

Then should women dress properly in order to reduce rape?

Or is "not being raped" less important than "walking around half-naked"?

You sound like a Jewish supremacist. Diversity is not only a great benefit to every country, but it should be obligatory to prevent racism and bigotry throughout the world. We are all part of one race: the human race. There is no need for borders and intolerance of those different to us.

What?

Well, I do know how non-racist it is in a country where pretty everyone is "Asian" as the fill-out forms in the US call it. In comparison, do you think that China, Japan, South Korea, etc., are really being racist in any tangible way? I am more interested in knowing what tangible ways there are.

Sooo Implementation of such a plan is irrelevant, got it. 

How do you actually function as someone who doesn't believe race exists?

If I'm interacting with someone who expresses their belief in races, I'd likely just ask them what they actually mean when they bring up a racial construct.  The last time this happened someone said their wife was "white".  I asked what that meant, and they meant that she likes Starbucks, and comes off as a bit shallow and materialistic. 

Instead of projecting nonsense onto their wife, I actually know what they meant.  

My life is not burdened by strange relations or more complicated from distorted views. I just don't think about races from day to day.  It's not the first thing I think when I see someone, nor the last.  I tend to get along with people perfectly fine.  I don't typically invite people with such notions around my family, so there is that.  It's not as if I have something against anyone in particular.  I just want my family to be respected, so if you want to meet my family you have to be respectful.

Do you think forensic scientists just make stuff up when they identity the race of someone through their skull shape?

I think I would have to ascertain what they are intending to communicate and consider what the methodology is comprised of. 

Often times in law enforcement people are following protocol.  If that is the case, they are not "making stuff up".  The stuff was made up for them.

Do you think skin color is just random?

Broadly speaking I am not sure how ensoulment works.  Does our body limit us by happenstance?  Is it selected for us to lead a certain life, with certain perspective?  

I don't believe it was truly made according to a construct arbitrated by man.  I know that for certain.   

Reserving ourselves to a biological approach, it appears random from observation in the sense that you cannot predict someone's skin tone by looking at their parents, though the apple does not fall far from the tree.  With practice, one might be able to approximate the range of possibilities the majority of the time.  

Does that answer your question?

Ethnicity is sentimental because it is rooted in perception of shared experience.  A race would generally not have a shared sentiment.

It should seem obvious that the concept of a race is not equivalent to an ethnic group. 

I think this statement happens to hold true whether or not one should believe in such things.  

Well, we all share similar "evolutionary baggage", though social development relative to the global spread of humanity, dictated cultural variation in both thought and the way we do things.

So I would suggest that seepage might flow the opposite way, but I'm certainly not an expert in human physiological development.    

Current global trends would seem to substantiate my suggestion; especially with reference to LBGTQ etc. Though this is not taking into account the possible influence evolving environmental conditions might have upon physiological evolution.

Anatomical and biological evolution was a much slower and older process, and though directly linked to what you refer to as latter day racial differences. I would still strongly suggest that Kaitlyn's condition is simply resultant of  latter day misinformation rather than her self-perceivable evolutionary differences per se.

Isolated groups of people will behave in the way you predict, but as you just indicated seepage will inevitably affect cultural evolution; bearing in mind that evolution is an ongoing process and not a process that stopped a few hundred years ago somewhere in a region now referred to as the USA.

The modern USA is now undoubtedly now a mix of old cultures evolving into another shared  culture.

Though faces and certain inherited behaviour are still perceivably different; but this is just is just indicative of how slow anatomical and biological evolution is when compared to cultural evolution and cultural seepage.

And as I previously stated, planet Earth still affords some sub-groups physical isolation to a degree. Though rapid  technological evolution, with particular regard to global communication and social media, means that everyone else is only the tap of a finger away.

He thinks doxxing will make him one of the kool kids.

This is most definitely solid proof Fanchick drinks Bud Light.

So, this 76% shows your "alternative" isn't correct.

No, it doesn't. You continue to pretend that one single explanation must account for the entire variance, otherwise we can chuck it away. That's nonsense. 

Cisgender people commit suicide too, so we're talking about accounting for the difference between two, and there are likely a multitude of factors why. Even if mental illness is part of it, that still wouldn't explain all of it. These aren't all or nothing propositions.

Also, I've been allowing you to mischaracterize what I said for a while now so let's finally take a moment to address it; I never claimed "victimization" was the cause, I said trans people are the most ostracized in our society (whether they are actually the most ostracized - the part you decided to focus on - is irrelevant to my point).

Being ostracized comes in many different forms, not just "victimization" (however they are even defining it). It also means being made fun of, being talked about, being targeted, etc. This thread alone is just another example of it. Imagine living in a society where half go so far to not accept you for who you are that they cite studies where they don't even agree with is authors but use its data anyway to argue that you're mentally ill. Imagine your own family and especially your parents don't accept you for who you are to the point where they disown you. Shit, under those circumstances I might kill myself too or at the very least act out, so I guess I'm mentally ill as well.

Show me where your studies account for all of this.

When people use analogies, they never use things that are the same. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a point in an analogy.

I'm not refuting your argument on the basis that it doesn't line up perfectly, I'm refuting it on the basis that not one element of these two "conditions" are analogous to each other.

If you want to argue that "transgenderism" is a mental illness on the basis that it leads to increased suicides, bullying, etc. that's fine. We can agree or disagree on those merits but comparing any of this to schizophrenia is deeply flawed. We don't treat schizophrenics the way we do because someone called their condition a mental illness, we treat them the way we do because that's what their condition demands. Stick to arguing the condition, not the classification.

You have ZERO explanation for these extremely elevated rates of detrimental outcomes.

Complete nonsense. I've given you explanations that are quite frankly common sense, you reject them outright because I haven't produced a study showing them to you.

So since common sense is apparently invalid in this conversation let me provide the exact same thing I've been saying in the form of a study:

The suicide attempt rate among transgender persons ranges from 32% to 50% across the countries. Gender-based victimization, discrimination, bullying, violence, being rejected by the family, friends, and community; harassment by intimate partner, family members, police and public; discrimination and ill treatment at health-care system are the major risk factors that influence the suicidal behavior among transgender persons.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/

Now you can go on and study the various factors at play here and stop pretending I've produced nothing.

I didn't bring up balanced budgets, you did. I am asking a legitimate question  directly related to the subject. Where is all the money going to come from to fund it and will the current welfare system be abolished or will this just be added to it?

Should I go into specifics?  Or should I answer "without going into specifics?"

"Universal basic income experiment made people happier but not more likely to get a job"

"Finland's Social Insurance Institution (FSII) has published the results of an income experiment it carried out for two years to learn more about ways to reduce unemployment. They report that their experiment showed that giving unemployed people a no-strings-attached guaranteed income instead of an unemployment allowance made them happier and less stressed—but it did not make them any more or less likely to get a job."

https://phys.org/news/2019-02-universal-basic-income-people-happier.html

I don't think you have any understanding of where govts gets the money it spends. Just my personal observation based on your last response.

Ethnicity is sentimental because it is rooted in perception of shared experience.  A race would generally not have a shared sentiment.

It should seem obvious that the concept of a race is not equivalent to an ethnic group. 

I live as a person Kaitlyn.

What does live as a white person actually mean?

Jews are a mixed bag

One of the saddest things I've come across in my life is the fact that Israel isn't diverse.

Nor is China, I think 99%+ of Chinese citizens are... "Asians". Nor is Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Sweden, etc.

Diversity can bring benefits, but it itself should not be considered an obligatory feature.

Not every country is an immigrant country like the US.