What happened to Derple's thread accusing Helen Joyce of advocating "trans elimination"? by MarkTwainiac in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris[M] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Derrple deleted it. It's still viewable if you open it through your comment history, it just doesn't show up on the front page anymore, nothing I can do about it.

“What is a Woman” by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah he's like one step away from psychopathic. And that's probably being generous.

“What is a Woman” by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He's super alt-right, in the "women should stay in the kitchen" camp, but unironically.

Also believes that criminalizing abortion in every circumstance is a good thing.

“What is a Woman” by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'd probably be interested in watching it if it wasn't made by Matt Walsh. What a disgusting man.

Calls for trans elimination by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There are no qt mods. Technically there is one but theyve been MIA forever. Im neither GC nor QT. I'd say I even probably am slightly more lenient to qt posters, just because it's literally you vs the world, but I can't really excuse word-for-word rule breaking.

You're welcome to reply a comment of mine or send me a message when you've edited your earlier post.

Calls for trans elimination by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris[M] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not to burst your bubble, but even if it were to come to that, you not being able to say that kind of thing in a debate sub with 10~ other active people will likely have 0 impact ever. The rules exist to facilitate debate. I'm not policing your language, im policing your language HERE.

Calls for trans elimination by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris[M] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh and the Nazi comparison is highly apt

It's not, and it won't be until someone comes along and commits literal genocide, so with any luck, it will NEVER be, hence the rule. Talking about the sins of the nazis and how they affected you is very different from claiming that is equivalent to any form of hate any community recieves today. My mother is quietly homophobic, it's not a good thing, but she's not a Nazi, nor would any comparison be "apt" in any way.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I wasn't going to ban circling for something that happened before I became a mod

Sorry, that sounded like an accusation toward you, but it was mostly just a statement about flippy's own reasoning. I don't think you handled that situation badly.

QT posters are neither nice. FAR from it. I don't know why should I be "nice"

Again, just an observation, not an accusation. I dont think you have any need or obligation to be nice in the first place. As long as everyone involved knows how to differentiate between nice and civil, there isn't really a problem.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't really think any of the GC posters here are "nice" traditionally save maybe worried. But that's not the issue. The issue is house breaks rules because she's never once been punished for it beyond biology saying stop. It's an issue exclusive to her. Flippy left because biology didn't ban a qt user (who honestly i would have banned had I been a mod then) and I wasn't really here to even see adungitit so I can't really comment on them. Your personal experience with house notwithstanding, it doesn't change the fact that she unashamedly and openly breaks rules, and after I was made mod I said specifically I wouldn't tolerate it. And I didn't. Simple as.

You're welcome to wait the generous 3 days, which at the rate this place moves is pretty much nothing, and tell her that yourself though. Not that I don't doubt she's still lurking and writing a very long essay about how i'm on a power trip for doing what should have been done 6 months before I showed up.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I stand by my opinion that the lack of QT users is because they are not interested in debating.

And i mean that's fine, you're allowed to believe whatever you want. I'm not going to try and change your mind because you clearly had access to all this information and didn't think differently then. But the fact of the matter is house abused your lack of policing to an extreme. I stand by my opinion that primarily she created a toxic environment that the qt posters who WOULD have been interested in posting here didn't want to deal with her being given free reign.

Also they are too used to be in a bubble where any question or doubt about transgenderism is treated as heresy and where everyone is forced to use "inclusive" language. Of course they won't like this sub unless we apply the same criteria than elsewhere.

No group is a monolith, people are unique. You're right that the majority of trans people live in that bubble, but clearly not all of them do because plenty have come and left.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Okay, I get you slapped people on the wrist. But unless you can explain literally ignoring reports about house where she is undeniably breaking rules I don't know what to tell you. Like, you can talk about these things all day, it doesn't change the evidence. House clearly needed more than a slap on the wrist more than half a year ago. You didn't do it. She's been reported so much it's baffling, and it's clear a lot of the lack of qt users you guys have is directly related to her.

Edit

Just looked, Even porcelain herself said she didn't think you were biased in your moderating, but was concerned about the posts being left up.

Second edit, it isn't just you, peaking and porcelain clearly didnt do anything about it either. God only knows why.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You could easily verify this by looking at the mod log

Sadly, no one can, because the geniuses behind this website make the log clear beyond 2 months. But regardless, there are plenty of reported and unmoderated clearly rulebreaking comments from her in the reports you ignored. I can link them if you want.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You could probably make the argument it is. I didn't mean it as one, but you could. Funny thing though, there's a difference between a softball "you're acting like a child" and a softball "you clearly lack human empathy". If that's the hill you want to die protecting then by all means, be my guest.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris[M] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Ban me, I know you will. It’s not a punishment. It’s a great proof of all my criticisms of you.

You have one criticism of me, and its that I have a grudge against you. It couldnt be that I'm on your ass specifically because over half of the unmoderated reports are of you. Take that in. You are proveably the most toxic person here and the other mods fucking coddled you and I am SINCERELY sorry you let that get to your head. Take 3 days, learn some respect for others and yourself.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Grow up

Hah. Ironic.

"It still stands" means despite the fact i was rude with my delivery, the underlying point still stands. That point being you have issues interacting with people without being toxic. The conversation is over, you got your warning, push the envelope and see what happens. Sorry you can't get away with whatever you want anymore.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I edited my comment after acknowledging you were right I was rude. You have literally no ground to stand on here. Drop it.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I’ll edit my comment when you can manage your emotions and answer questions instead of acting like I called someone a nazi or a pervert.

Amazing. Those goal posts are so far away I can't even see them anymore.

You enjoy standing by your delightful choice to call an autistic woman inhuman when called out for hypocrisy. Says far more about you as a person than anything I say here says about me.

Except I didn't. I said you're right, im sorry, and then self edited. Yesterday. Because I'm not a 10 year old. You're clearly just looking to play the victim though because you completely skimmed over that.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No you suggested THEY lacked empathy. Stop downplaying it. Move on with your life house, I warned you and you're welcome to edit your comment and I'll undelete it. Maybe the reason you feel I have a vendetta against you is you're the only one who consistently breaks rules. Whine about it to someone else, my phone is about to die, and i'm not budging.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You know, you are right, that was rude of me. It still stands though, i'm sorry you've never faced consequences for going off the rails here, and i'm sorry that it happens once and you're unhappy about it. There is a gendercritical sub you're welcome to browse where you dont have to put in a modicum of effort to censor yourself.

But yeah, i'm power tripping. Complain to grixit who has literally abandoned this place to write fan fiction or peaking who will fall at your feet and apologize for the injustice, i dunno. Til then, accept that actions have consequences.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Considering i've literally been hands off for over a month, im not sure how I start "a lot of snarky shit". You're observations are cool, but you need to understand that they're driven by your own opinions, not fact. From the opposite point of view, you're heartless for wanting to restrict medical access to teens, even if a sizable portion of of them will regret it, you're favouring them over the portion that won't. Be human to the people you're talking to. Youre right im sorry last part uncalled for. ;(

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What a frightening lack of empathy combined with an unshakeable conviction that you know better than all others what is good for children.

Thinly veiled personal attack.

Wpath and the eunuch archives by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Since we've devolved to thinly veiled personal attacks, congrats, you're done. Welcome to try again though.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Its 2022 women can be kings get with the times grandma.

Or something

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Eh, nevermind, not worth it. If you're going to keep lying I'm just not going to interact. You win, you're the debate king, now laugh emoji me a couple times so you can have the last word and we can go on our way.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

1) if by act like this you mean be a sounding board for LS to make up her own arguments for me and then ignore when I call that out then I don't know what to tell you. I made an offhanded comment about famous people not really having a place in a conversation about cancel culture and LS decided that was enough to have a field day.

2) YOU can just as easily do porcelains job as I can. I doubt I'm anymore sympathetic to qt users than you are, I can just look at the phrase "I don't believe the rules matter" and know that that might be an issue to not ignore completely.

If anything though I do feel bad for responding in the first place, because really it was pretty obvious she wanted to pick a fight and I really could have just ignored her.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And while I'm here, my being a mod is literally hinged on nothing. The second a radfem poster directly breaks a rule and I take any action, you'll move to protect your golden children who can do no wrong and remove the mod status immediately. And thats assuming you ever actually get trans posters back in the first place, which you won't. Acting like i need to act high and mighty when im playing in the kid pen with other kids is silly.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And I still have no clue what you’re point was to begin with

At least we're on the same page there, bud. Biology said drop it, you said you were dropping it, drop it.

I foolishly left inbox replies on for bios comment, this has been fixed. Cheers, my dude.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Lmao. I turned off replies after like 6 posts, and i did it because LS's version of moving on is moving on to the reply button. If she can't figure it out then i can figure it out for her. Not my problem you all are so starved for conflict you'll make shit up to put it in my mouth for me to keep writing longwinded paragraphs about things I didnt even imply

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You've "moved on" like three times now, LS. Putting things in caps doesn't make your point. Making up things i've said doesn't make your point. In the first place you've veered so far off of "famous people are immune to cancel culture don't give them the free advertising they want" that im flabbergasted you've made it as far as you have. Since moving on is so hard for you, I'll make it easy and turn off inbox replies.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So we're just ignoring the fact that you basically made up things I said and moving on, cool. You wanna know a super cool thing about all those people? They're still rich. Their lives weren't impacted in any way except now they can't become more rich. And even that's not really true, its more likely they just don't care to keep going. Because they're rich. Are you not getting that?

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My main point was that rich and famous people can't be canceled, so why are you asking me to prove that they have been? You've really lost me, LS.

Also no where once did I say anything remotely resembling "everyone/most people who speaks out against trans issues gets fired". I even looked and the best I could find was that the vague concept of "cancellation" was happening frequently.

It's probably time to stop, huh?

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Uhhh. Maya Forstater? But you're right, time wasting. It got way off track and I didn't explain myself well enough since I was posting in between work. Maybe someday I'll explain better. Have a fun Friday.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Alright

1) I'm not talking about non public-figure individuals. Non public figures can and have been "cancelled", as was the case with Maya and others. They're the vulnerable ones.

2)Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh and blaire white CAN be cancelled, but they won't be cancelled for having views that made them famous in the first place. Alt-right figureheads are literally completely unaffected by the whims of leftists on Twitter. Milo yia-i think young gay guys getting molested by older men is a good thing-nopolis was cancelled because he went against core alt right beliefs, not because he was racist and sexist and just generally a bad person.

3) my main point is that "attempting to cancel rowling and punish chappelle" is the same as attempting to drink the entire ocean by yourself. As in impossible in every way, shape, and form. So as a whole we should really stop centering conversations about actually real life lives being ruined around literal multi-millionaires and billionaires who don't give two shits about the things they say because they're doing it for profit anyways. While the general public are laughing and rolling their eyes about billionaires being unaffected by social duress they're immune to in the first place, people are having their lives ruined every day.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, can we at least agree that people with more wealth and media/internet presence than small countries cannot be 'canceled'? Implying that jk rowling or dave chapelle could be in literally any social or financial danger is worse than a bad joke.

Edit

Sounded more hostile than I meant, sorry, just mean to say that implying tras ever had a chance of cancelling them was, well... Silly? Sorry.

How much do we owe to strangers? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think the study is great. Really shows how a majority of people don't hate trans people (especially when you exclude the religious right), we just don't want them to intrude on spaces they dont belong in.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Again, handling criticism of them just fine, criticised them myself, there just might be one or two individuals who are more combative than others. But you already knew that.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You don’t see what’s faulty about claiming the most at risk are visibly gnc men and using only hate-crime statistics to do so?

So besides the fact that this is demonstrably untrue, I don't know what to tell you. Work on reading comprehension? Even from my own statistics racism is the biggest motivator. And besides that, I'm pretty sure I said specifically that they're not directly correlated statistics and I'm just making an assumption based on them. Because I'm not going to put more effort into it. Because in the first place I was just throwing out a reason I've heard trans males use to justify not using mens restrooms. That's it.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You may not have taken offence, but the way you bring it back to old topics like the supposed running off of qt, or the way you leaped to “you’re projecting and I don’t want to debate with you personally” makes it appear that you did take offence.

Supposed

We're still playing this?

Anyways, my claim wasn't proven faulty by anyone but biology. MT came in to try and explain why I'm clearly wrong (and ableist and ageist, lol) with absolutely zero proof to back their claims. And then took offense that I'm not playing that game. Which I stand by. I'm not here to be the stand in qt punching bag.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did I? Because:

1) I was clear it was an assumption based on related data.

2) the only person who actually gave me anything statistically relevant was Biology, and I don't remember taking offense in my response.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for the links. I figured they were overstated but its nice to have numbers to point at. Cheers.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

certain posters like me because you seem to see yourself as superior

Stop projecting. I don't want to debate you because I believe the exact same thing as you. I'm not challenging or refuting your points, i am actively telling you I am not interacting with them, because I am not in any disagreement with you. Again: I posted a devils advocate post to give a hypothetical reason why a trans male would not want to be in a male space. That is it. Stop trying to act like I'm specifically targetting you because I won't act like I know the intricacies of the minds of every trans person in the world and don't want to debate for them.

Edit: to you and anyone else, this is what I mean when I say you drive trans/qt posters off. Why are you so goddamn confrontational? You're all grown adults, act like it a little.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

If you aren't interested in debating, why on earth are you on a debate sub?

I'm not interested in debating YOU. I am not qt. Giving a short and easy devils advocate answer is not the equivalent of being the soundboard for your many strawman arguments. You have several spaces for that. You're allowed to say whatever the hell you want, I don't owe you MY time to respond to tangential arguments that have next to nothing to do with my initial reply in the first place. Im being as respectful as possible in saying don't waste your time, i will not respond to it. It's not my fault you all don't have qt posters to write novella posts at, it is yours.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Okay, this is a nice and well thought out post, but I'm going to stop you right here so you don't waste the effort again.

1) I used the hate crime data to extrapolate because it's the only data I could easily find. If you've got an issue with that you're welcome to counter it with more narrow and focused data. Anecdotes are not data.

2) I guess your whole point is that males are very violent in general? Which is my point too, so glad we can hit the same notes.

3) I am not playing devils advocate to discuss the intricacies of who gets beat up and where. My point is that being visibly non-heteronirmative is a reason trans natal males might flee intimate male spaces. If you disagree with that specifically, then I'd be happy to continue discussing it, but I'm not going off on wild and imaginative tangents for something I don't believe in, sorry.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, I don't know? I'm sure it'd be a statistic someone's got somewhere, but I don't know where and it's veering into the 'too off-topic for me to want to try and find it' region.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well, according to that link I posted most hate crimes are motivated by racism, so no?

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Just assuming tbh. Found this after a couple seconds of googling, doesn't list age as far as I can tell but since disability is less than 5% that of sexual orientation, I think it's a safe assumption. Take it with a grain of salt though, obviously.

Edit: oops, link might help huh

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/latest-hate-crime-statistics-report-released

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Old and disabled men arent nearly at the risk of visibly gay and other non-het men. Doesn't excuse it, but it is something to keep in mind that in some parts of the world that kind of presentation will actively put you im danger in intimate spaces.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Why do you think they have no social power

Sorry, I should have been more specific. Specifically, they don't have the social power to change toxic and violent masculinity specifically. They have political and social power, just not the kind that would do anything in this specific situation.

Announcement: new mod by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know that you can, tbh. You can't expect random passersby like on reddit, since this site is pretty much a wasteland in terms of trans people lol. Id say the only way to bring any new ones in would be to pray. Maybe an old poster will come back and, maybe with a cleaned up act here and less ignoring of literally self-admitted rule-breaking, might invite a friend. Maybe someone can find somewhere an advert for this place that will reach that target audience without getting taken down instantly.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I do get that in the real world we just have to deal, regardless of how we feel.

That's the crux of it, for me I guess. I agree most women wouldn't say anything to a nonpassing TW, so that makes "go where you'd look normal going" harder. But again like, at the end of the day, I'm happier if the absolute minimum to infringe on women's spaces is happening. Sorry if im not explaining myself well it's past my bedtime, I'm getting too sleepy.

Announcement: new mod by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Lol, don't worry, I'm just being silly. If you guys get qt posters back, I'll be here.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And it's one I cant answer because I'm not arbiter of nothing. I mean hell I'm mostly blind so I can literaly not be the deciding factor. In a perfect world scenario trans people would be their own best judge of passing and decide based on that. This isn't a perfect world, and a lot of them have no respect, it's just how I personally feel on the matter.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is wishy-washy make-believe scenario where everything fits nicely and pass/don't pass is an easy question to answer. The real world isn't, so there is no one size fits all answer. Besides, you know, just respect women and don't use women's facilities, but we're well past expecting that.

Announcement: new mod by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Considering there's no qt posters to moderate for, I doubt I'll even get a chance to go crazy with power, but I'll try my best to make it interesting nonetheless.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know the common response to the argument is "it's not women's job to sort out men's problems", but I've always felt that's too much of an oversimplification of the issue. I personally don't feel it's my responsibility to take on part of the collective burden toxic masculinity has on trans people, but at the same time I don't think its reasonable to put that on the backs on people with zero social power to enact that change. Go to the bathroom you look like you're supposed to use, don't use changing rooms or any other more intimate women's spaces, the world will continue to rotate.

QT: Why TM don't mind using women's spaces when it suits them? And why TW don't follow their example? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I guess since no one's here I'll play devils advocate and say maybe men's spaces are just more dangerous than women's spaces for non-heteronormative people? I honestly can't think of any other reason besides a sense of entitlement mysteriously lacking from a lot of TM.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I feel like this holds less weight considering you're still ignoring the self-admitted rule breaking.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

House, you gonna really keep this conversation going? You really gonna keep doing this when it doesn't matter what you say anymore, you flat admitted to not following the rules. All the bullshit about not agreeing with them and whatever else doesn't matter, it's childish and simple to follow a rule like that, and you managed to fail. Your reasoning is irrelevant, the fact that i fucking AGREE with you is irrelevant, you're failing the big part of the test and proudly admitting it.

they will give you all the ass pats you can handle

Not a good look from you in a GC echo chamber, bud.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

...yes. Fact isn't requiring of proof for it to remain fact. I'm eating dinner right now. I can't prove that to you, that doesn't change that I factually am eating dinner. The discussion isn't about whether I can prove that gc users aren't actively punished for rule breaking (which is objective fact, house misgendered the one qt mod in this very post and it's being ignored), it's that they aren't and that's the reason why you've got no opposition in your echo chamber, which is conjecture, but again considering the rule-breaking here being ignored, I'm feeling pretty confident im more right than not.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Neither of us can prove our claims, but there's a mod chatting here too who is actively confirming mine, despite being obviously biased in favor of gc posters. I don't know why that's making you so salty, but maybe chill.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sure, absolutely, I'll even recuse myself from this thread and not take any action against an unnamed user's direct and intentional rule-breaking since it could be construed that I did it spitefully. You could, though, enforce the rules as an unbiased third party. Prove you actually care about gc rule-breaking.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There is only a QT user who was temporary banned. All the permant bans have been mostly the same spammer who likes to pose as QT (but is not) and alt right users.

Per biology. Your mental gymnastics don't change fact. We don't have access to prior logs, doesn't mean I didn't watch them as they happened

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't remember off the top of my head, moderation log only logs 2 months anyways so it's not like you can check. Pretty sure I've seen thegreensquid and circlingmyvoid though.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

What were you temporarily banned for? Was it, gasp, being toxic, perhaps? Surely not, because the most toxic thing gc users do here is 'disagree'.

been requested by mods to edit plenty of shit that I think is absurd like not being allowed to call a male user he.

And you don't think that maybe not being able to follow simple rules shouldn't preclude you from being in a space where those rules are in place to make the environment less toxic for the qt posters?

You're sure doing a shit job of proving you definitely aren't hostile or toxic.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

you didn’t spend the hour scouring my comments

Correct. I don't know if you are aware of this, but hyperlinks are blue in most browsers on the internet. Quickly scrolling down until i found a wall of blue took me less than a minute.

And once again, not qt, don't disagree with you, doesn't change the fact that gishgalloping with anecdotal evidence isn't debating, it's virtue-signaling.

Edit:

I’m certain it’s an absolute coinkydink that you stopped replying after such a massive failure and you didn’t spend the hour scouring my comments in vain hope of a gotcha. You must have just had business to attend to at the most convenient moment for you.

I'm sure you not responding for over a day is indicitive of the same thing, right? Surely you don't sleep or work or do anything else but post exclusively here on this dead site.

As of now it is now bedtime, and I work in the morning, so don't expect me for a while since, yknow, if I don't give you my full itinerary I must be dodging a question.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You know, I see this a lot here and since I'm posting for a bit before we all admit this place is dead, I have to ask. Do you not know what hyperbole is? Does anyone here? Are you just reading 'axe-murderer' and ignoring the rest of the comment because you're seeing red or something?

Cause like, it's clear I'm saying that it's possible to be toxic without being "them" levels of toxic. It's clear that I'm being hyperbolic to laugh at the idea that because "actually, they're toxic" that you magically can't be any amount of toxic yourselves at all. Who knows, maybe I'm crazy.

And again, I'm not qt, I disagree with qt, so by your logic I've called myself as toxic as a billionaire, and that's just a mean thing to imply.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Sure, I'd absolutely love to. I'll gladly moderate a debate sub with only one side, sounds like a piece of cake.

And so we're clear, never doing anything other than forcing comment edits after the fact is the problem. There's literally no reason for gc users not to be inflammatory, because they know they won't be punished in the slightest AND their overwhelmingly one-sided court of opinion will love them for it. Imagine how a qt user feels in that environment, I'm sure they're so glad that after having been slurred in some way the person in question was politely asked to edit their comment and nothing else.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, so you DO understand that individuals don't have responsibility for their group as a whole.

See, I would never have known, since you seem to only think that about yourself.

https://saidit.net/s/GCdebatesQT/comments/8agq/for_people_who_think_bathrooms_should_be/uspy

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, don't get me wrong, I used this toxic dump as a source of entertainment, I'm certainly morally bankrupt in that department. Once again, just enjoying the mental gymnastics you're playing.

You cherry picking the shitty qt arguments doesn't absolve the actual ones i've seen posted here. The big radfem group in america basicly being in bed financially with the alt right? I'd say thats valid. That post got literally zero traction though, I wonder why. It certainly can't be that you're all for the most part here to dunk on teens who can't form a coheremt argument to save their lives, can it?

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

They don't 'only ever' respond at all now though. :)

And for the record, qt posters aren't angels either. At the very least im of the opinion void/whatevertheywerecalledbeforeistartedlurking should have absolutely been banned.

I just can't get over how high and mighty you all are, don't worry, my feelings are very much still mostly intact!

And for all your aloof attitude about me, changing your flair for me is about the nicest thing anyone has ever done, so thanks for that.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, is the lady who posted "qt only posts to be mean" to the thunderous applause of the now 100% gc sub above such frivolity?

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

You've both acted appallingly, and only one side gets banned consistently. Weird, huh?

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You're the fucking mod, i've seen you remove gc comments for crossing the imaginary line of plausible deniability. You can scroll back in the moderation log and theres plenty of removed comments from gc users, BY YOU. The fucking gall to ask for proof when you know for a fact im right is amazing beyond words. Or did you not know the moderation log was public?

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

"I don't have an answer for you".

Paraphrased for you.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

it's absurd you think we're toxic for refusing to entertain their ever-incressing demands, lies and threaths.

Or maybe just that you actively maintain a hostile environment. You give gc users a slap on the wrist when they repeatedly break rules, you actively perform mental gymnastics to say direct harassment and bad-mouthing isn't against any rules, and just generally don't have any standards whatsoever with regards to moderating your own side. If you don't believe me, go into the moderator log and count how many times you've "warned" a gc user vs actually temporarily banned them.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You probably also aren't as toxic as axe murderers and billionaires. You are allowed to be toxic while still being less toxic than other people. This shouldn't be something you need explained to you.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Okay? I don't disagree, but at the end of the day you can't be the thought police any more than they can. Seperating sex and gender while acknowledging sex is far better than blurring the lines so that sex can be misinterpreted. There's nothing more to it than that, you don't need to read deep into it.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This would be a gotcha if i were qt, but as luck would have it I am not, so im happy to say both you and they are very toxic.

And what, should i be impressed that you don't instantly ban any dissenters? Is that what you want? Congratulations for meeting the absolute minimum requirements for a DEBATE space.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, sorry, should i have called them "the good ones"? Never seen that in terrible context before.

And cute you've got no response to the fact that your qt posters have been gone for months. Love to know how im wrong though.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Why would i answer a question not directed toward me? I think 'gender' is a load of bull, but if it lets trans people express themselves without denying biological fact then cool, good for them.

My complaint achieves exactly as much as yours does, or is yours actually magically better somehow? I'm not claiming moral superiority, just chuckling at how wildly laughable your "oh no i guess my points are too strong for the mean transes to debate me" comment is in a sub with no trans people left who arent licking boots.

Repeating yourself with the “running off the qts” bit isn’t making it true.

Correct. My repeating doesn't make it true. It just IS true. Or are you telling me they dont want to stay in a hostile 10-1 against them space with zero moderation on their behalf because they understand how much smarter you are than them and they'll never be able to beat you in an entirely unrigged internet debate?

You (personally) should have thought a little bit more.

The jab doesn't work unless you follow through with it all the way. You even literally said 'you personally' earlier in your post. Be consistent if you're gonna try to clap back, come on.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Seems like you're just as empty handed when it comes to debates

Who do you mean by "you're"? It certainly can't be me personally, since up until this point i've exclusively lurked, and I'm absolutely more on gc side than not, so I hope it's not the collective you.

I love this place because it's a toxic cesspit and fun to watch, but I assure you i have literally 0 skin in the game so let me tell you a secret. You (collectively) had trans people who wanted to debate try REALLY hard to post here for years. You (collectively) ran them out and now you're posting about how morally superior you are compared to them in a glorified echo chamber where the only people left are you (collectively). You (personally) need hobbies.

Qt, Why is gender so important? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]beris 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Lord save me, it's amazing how you can drive off the only like, what, two posters who aren't a part of your echo chamber, and without a shred of irony boast your own moral superiority about it. This sub was fun to watch as a dumpster fire before, now it's just sad.