Enjoy.

[Zak S]

Zak, people can genuinely differ over assertions of fact.

And when the stakes are high (like peoples real lives), the person then must then investigate fully or else they are doing something morally wrong--they're being negligent.

And if they make a mistake, they need to apologize.

Like the guy who this whole thread started with.

[DocJones]

And if they make a mistake, they need to apologize.

Like the guy who this whole thread started with.

Looking forward to your apology to Morse.

[Brad]

"No u" isn't proof against his claim.

Haha, why did I expect anything less. Literal LOL again.

Take your fucking L like a man, you syphilis-riddled methhead.

[Grognard GM]

I have my friends and relatives who are transgender...

Trans are a fraction of a percentage point of the population. Most Americans don't even have a single Trans friend or family member, by sheer statistical probability. How do you explain having multiples of both friends and family that are Trans?

If someone kept talking about how so many of their friends and family members had shaven heads, bright white sneakers, and matching jumpsuits, I'd suspect they were in a cult.

[GeekyBugle]

I'm not endorsing anything that Zak says, and find his style of argument wacko. However, if the question is threat to transgender people, there are studies like this:
...
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

BY whom?

This is like the hidden domestic violence incidence for lesbians.

WHO is victimizing the trannies? Other trannies.

LOL, it's worst than I thought, the data is from a survey of about 240K people, it's not based on ACTUAL crime statistics but in people saying they were victimized.

What source do you base on? Are there studies showing that transgender people are responsible for excessive violence? From the studies I have seen, transgender people commit violent crime and suicide at similar rates as their assigned birth sex. So transgender women can be violent, but no moreso than non-transgender men.

In other words, this suggests transgender people are just people. They aren't angels, but they also aren't demons.

For victimization, the data source is the NCVS - which was established in 1972 under Richard Nixon because looking at only at cases successfully investigated and prosecuted by the police produced a biased view of crime rates. Local police departments are motivated to under-report their crime rates, so a national randomized and anonymous survey has been considered an important check on local police. Looking at only convicted/proven crimes can result in a massive undercounting of how much crime actually occurs. Think of things like car break-ins or shoplifting, not to mention rape and assault.

EDITED TO ADD: As I said, I don't consider myself an expert in transgender psychology. If you have other information sources about transgender violence rates, I'd be interested to read them.

The vast majority of the crimes are committed intra community not by people from outside, this is true for race and sexuality, why should it be different for the trans?

A survey has exactly ZERO validity as evidence, especially when talking about people who think that not using their neo pronouns or correct gendering them or using their birth-name IS violence. "It's ma'am!"

I'm sure this isn't true of ALL trans, but the type more likely to answer such a survey (it's a self-selecting process which is why it has no validity) are the type to break into tears over people not participating in their delusion and to resort to violence over it. Because they have a mental illness.

Take for instance the surveys that pretended to prove that US colleges were a hot bed of rape/sexual assault against women, turns out US colleges are safer than the city they're located in. So, no, surveys do not prove shit.

[Valatar]

Out there on the internet I came across what was purported to be the judgement for the trial between you and your ex. I am no lawyer, but it looked to me as though the judge ruled that all but two of her public claims against you were true, including threatening to evict her if she didn't have sex with you, belittling her appearance until she got a boob job, and not stopping during sex if she said you were hurting her.  I dunno you, I dunno her, maybe she suckered the judge with cunning lies, maybe you two had some freaky d/s thing going on where she was totes into rough sex with the evil landlord roleplay, consenting adults and all that. But if it is as she was presenting it, and it was not kinky consenting adults things, you should invest more time in making some life changes than hunting down assholes on the internet, because people should not treat their partners in that manner. At least without discussions and safewords and whatnot.

[Zak S]

Out there on the internet I came across what was purported to be the judgement for the trial between you and your ex. I am no lawyer, but it looked to me as though the judge ruled that all but two of her public claims against you were true, including threatening to evict her if she didn't have sex with you, belittling her appearance until she got a boob job, and not stopping during sex if she said you were hurting her.  I dunno you, I dunno her, maybe she suckered the judge with cunning lies, maybe you two had some freaky d/s thing going on where she was totes into rough sex with the evil landlord roleplay, consenting adults and all that. But if it is as she was presenting it, and it was not kinky consenting adults things, you should invest more time in making some life changes than hunting down assholes on the internet, because people should not treat their partners in that manner. At least without discussions and safewords and whatnot.

Viv was lying, I won my case against her she lost her case against me.

We were dating, she moved in, then she started cheating on us and we ceased to be dating, so I said she should move out. That's it.

Here's the rundown:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38fCqOBYtQI&t=2s

Here's videotape of her getting caught lying: https://twitter.com/IHitItWithMyAxe/status/1632121312339705856

[rytrasmi]

If someone kept talking about how so many of their friends and family members had shaven heads, bright white sneakers, and matching jumpsuits, I'd suspect they were in a cult.

For the last time, it's not a cult, you insensitive clod! It's a social club!

[Zak S]

I have my friends and relatives who are transgender...

Trans are a fraction of a percentage point of the population. Most Americans don't even have a single Trans friend or family member, by sheer statistical probability. How do you explain having multiples of both friends and family that are Trans?

If you live in a cosmopolitan area, exist in communities with cosmopolitan values and/or come from a family with a history of cosmopolitan values then you're more likely to meet a lot of trans people.

Also: there's the thing called the internet which humans use to share common interests.

Most humans don't play old school D&D yet somehow I know so many people who do.

[Zak S]

So he accuses the person who won't play the trans game

If you have evidence that transgender rights activism is a "game" please do present it.

Paul Jaquays wrote Dark Tower.  Jennel had nothing to do with it.
Paul also wrote the Central Casting books which included tables of sexual disorders like transexualism, sadism and necrophilia.
Luckily Paul Jaquays has been canceled for being evil and misinformed. /s

Has that happened, when Jennel openly transitioned then she might've said "Oh I'm sorry I made a mistake when I was younger" and that would be the end of that.

Jennell is a smart person--I see no evidence she has the extremely online problem of equating apologizing with apocalyptic soul death.

[Zak S]

furthermore, in his addled brain being wrong (something he hasn't proven about Morse) is a crime, and has (in his addled brain) revolutionized modern jurisprudence by removing intent as something to take into consideration, ergo manslaughter will be treated as first degree murder from now on.

The point is not to punish Morse for being bad, it is to reduce the harm Morse causes by being bad.

If someone intends to be good and isn't, you still have to address it to prevent harm.

[Zak S]

The best we can do is share our experiences and studies.

No we can do way better: we can also reduce inaccuracies in public circulation.

If your experience is you're allergic to anchovies and the pizza delivery guy thinks you want the anchovy special, you gotta fix that if you want your pizza.

[Zak S]

I still don't see ANY accusations (false or otherwise) made by Morse.

Here is the accusation:

Morse falsely claimed trans people are not under threat (provably false) and the trans rights movement is rooted in narcissism (false).

1. All people are under threat, since harmful things can happen to anyone, so the first claim is categorically false.

Holy shit, that's the most pedantic thing I've ever seen you say. By that logic literally everyone is "under threat", and it gives no evidence that transgender people as a group or transgender individuals are under any more threat of any kind than anyone else in the world.

While I do believe trans people are disproportionately under threat based on what I know, I don't have to prove that in order for my claim against Morse to be true.

My job was to demonstrate that Brandon Mose spread misinformation.

I did.

Except it's contextually OBVIOUS that Morse wasn't suggesting that no transgender person was ever under any threat, that they could never be victims of crime or die of old age or lose a tooth. He was very obviously responding to the suggestion that there's a "trans genocide" happening, which the Trans Activists claim with ever more screeching alacrity every passing day even though the actual evidence very much shows that there is not a mass-killing of Trans people happening in the USA, or any other western country.

So, are you going to suggest it would be OK to ban those trans activists from Social Media for making "false accusations"?

If someone is spreadind misinformation the first thing to do is give them an opportunity to correct it.

If they don't they should have their ability to do that curtailed, using the method that is the least disruptive while still being effective.

It doesn't matter what their politics are.

[GeekyBugle]

Blah, blah, blah

"I assert X has caused harm (but provide no proof of my claim) and since I have erected myself into the sole judge, jury and executioner destroying those I have claimed are practicing witchcraft spreading harmful misinformation is morally good."

Go fuck yourself you sanctimonious, holier than thou, hypocritical POS.

It would be funny if it didn't caused REAL world harm to see the "words are violence" cunts committing ACTUAL violence against others.

[Zak S]

Blah, blah, blah

"I assert X has caused harm (but provide no proof of my claim)

If this is your claim then:

Ask for proof.

Don't assume your interlocutor has none.