DA Baracus Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 Oaksoft needs better material than 'Woke warriors'. It's too blatant. Needs to be more subtle when trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 "Woke Warriors" is poundshop Piers Morgan chat. Get it in the fucking bin immediately 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SweeperDee Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 No I'm saying you are a lazy b*****d and you should stop demanding people do your work for you. Good of you to show more of this "niceness" you folk claim to possess though. [emoji23] Meanwhile, back in the real world, the battle is being lost on the public's view of trans rights according to a YouGov poll. Maybe more of you need to get off your high horses posting abusive nonsense on things like Twitter, remove yourselves from your echo chambers and patting yourselves on the back and actually try actively listening to what people with opposing views have to say on this. You'd get further IMO. Where does the British public stand on transgender rights in 2022? | YouGov The reversal in attitudes seems to stem from the practical realisation of what it means to treat a man as a woman. In particular trans women taking part in women's sport is bringing this to the attention of a public who were previously largely uninterested in the wider trans debate. This section stands out:- "There has been an erosion in support for trans rights since 2018 ... ... ... On the key premise of whether Britons accept that a trans man is a man and a trans woman is a woman, there was net agreement that they are back in 2018 (+11, with 43% agreeing and 32% disagreeing in both cases). This agreement has diminished, with Britons now split, with 38% agreeing and 40% disagreeing that a trans woman is a woman, and a 39% / 39% split on whether or not a trans man is a man (net scores of -2 and ±0, respectively)."“You can abuse statistics all you like” etc etc. Bigot. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 Exactly. You can't even appeal to science either because apparently "feelings" trump biology and nobody else is allowed a different opinion. You do wonder where this level of arrogance comes from. No wonder huge swathes of the public aren't listening to them.I handt realised "a woman is a female human" was a scientifically thought out position tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxRover Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 40 minutes ago, oaksoft said: Exactly. You can't even appeal to science either because apparently "feelings" trump biology and nobody else is allowed a different opinion. You do wonder where this level of arrogance comes from. No wonder huge swathes of the public aren't listening to them. Given 1 in 100 births result in a child that doesn’t meet the “conventional” male/female definition, I find it really amusing the number of people arguing that biology is male/female, it isn’t. So, if you want to get all huffy about sports and such, then you need to get genetic materials from all winners (and second, just in case, and then third, just in case, etc) and determine if they are “pure” XX, XY, or one of any of several dozen other possibilities. Of course, now that sounds a wee bit fascist, doesn’t it? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 Sad to see yet another topic that Oaksoft's been reluctantly forced into the right-wing position on by the woke warriors, entitled union members, and benefits scroungers of a forum about a sport he's supposedly had no interest in since his youth. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWorldwideJr Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 55 minutes ago, TxRover said: Given 1 in 100 births result in a child that doesn’t meet the “conventional” male/female definition, I find it really amusing the number of people arguing that biology is male/female, it isn’t. So, if you want to get all huffy about sports and such, then you need to get genetic materials from all winners (and second, just in case, and then third, just in case, etc) and determine if they are “pure” XX, XY, or one of any of several dozen other possibilities. Of course, now that sounds a wee bit fascist, doesn’t it? I wouldn't bother. He's had all this explained to him multiple times on this thread already. He knows that 'the science' doesn't say what he claims that it says. He just doesn't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 Ben Shapiro patter now. Fabulous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GNU_Linux Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 26 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said: Ben Shapiro patter now. Fabulous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxRover Posted November 26, 2022 Share Posted November 26, 2022 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: Almost all humans are born with either XX or XY chromosomes with rare exceptions due to chromosome mutations. False, see: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/differences-in-sex-development/ 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: That is what determines whether you are a male or a female. Actually, about 2 of 1,000 babies are “assigned” a sex via surgery after birth…and another 8 of 1,000 are assigned a sex without surgery. These assignments may or may not involve parental knowledge. So, again, False. 2 hours ago, oaksoft said: If you disagree with this and think it should all be about "feelings", that's fair enough but you won't be arguing from a scientific point of view. Since you are so attached to science, you will now agree that it is you who are arguing from a non-scientific point of view. If you don’t, then you are conceding that you argument has always been about feelings, not science. Good luck. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxRover Posted November 27, 2022 Share Posted November 27, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: Did you even read that link? Yep…I figured a simple NHS link explaining there are a number of differing concerns and conditions was about your speed. You want the in depth, technical stuff, it’s available, but obviously ignored by you. Edited November 27, 2022 by TxRover 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Joe Posted November 28, 2022 Share Posted November 28, 2022 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: I posted that almost all humans are born with either XX or XY in rough agreement (bar hair splitting) with a post you made yourself earlier in which you had posted a figure of at least 99%. You then bizarrely responded "naw it isnae" and posted a link to an NHS web page which described a medical condition which in the very first line described it as "very rare" and seem to think you've won some kind of victory. Your debate skills are utterly baffling. Listen, you are absolutely welcome to believe whatever you want. I'm not interested in getting into a fight over it. You are even welcome to delude yourself into thinking you hold some moral high ground on this. It's literally no skin off my nose. It's all a bit pathetic really but you're welcome to it. What you are going to have to learn is that sometimes other people are simply going to hold different views from you. This seems to cause endless problems for you and a few others on here. This sort of thing is a life skill and it's really worth investing the time in learning it. That would be my advice. You are free to take it or discard it. Is that your parting shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxRover Posted November 28, 2022 Share Posted November 28, 2022 7 hours ago, oaksoft said: I posted that almost all humans are born with either XX or XY in rough agreement (bar hair splitting) with a post you made yourself earlier in which you had posted a figure of at least 99%. You then bizarrely responded "naw it isnae" and posted a link to an NHS web page which described a medical condition which in the very first line described it as "very rare" and seem to think you've won some kind of victory. Your debate skills are utterly baffling. Listen, you are absolutely welcome to believe whatever you want. I'm not interested in getting into a fight over it. You are even welcome to delude yourself into thinking you hold some moral high ground on this. It's literally no skin off my nose. It's all a bit pathetic really but you're welcome to it. What you are going to have to learn is that sometimes other people are simply going to hold different views from you. This seems to cause endless problems for you and a few others on here. This sort of thing is a life skill and it's really worth investing the time in learning it. That would be my advice. You are free to take it or discard it. Very rare…1 in 100…yep, clearly nothing alike there…thanks for agreeing with me, eh? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theroadlesstravelled Posted November 29, 2022 Share Posted November 29, 2022 What a headline. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee-Bey Posted November 29, 2022 Share Posted November 29, 2022 The only other nuclear waste guru I know is Homer Simpson who is also bald. Coincidence ? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted November 29, 2022 Share Posted November 29, 2022 Oaksoft: people on here are so arrogant and have no self-awareness. Also Oaksoft: *lengthy patronising humblebrag about life skills* 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted November 29, 2022 Share Posted November 29, 2022 3 hours ago, Stringer Bell said: The only other nuclear waste guru I know is Homer Simpson who is also bald. Coincidence ? I think not. Start a nuclear waste thread on here. You'll have half a dozen in about quarter of an hour. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suspect Device Posted December 1, 2022 Share Posted December 1, 2022 Scottish Prison Service criticised for moving trans woman Katie Dolatowski to Cornton Vale, Stirling | STV News Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Joe Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63837761 What exactly is your point here? You are all over the place in your attempts to put trans individuals down. Edited December 2, 2022 by Cosmic Joe -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moomintroll Posted December 2, 2022 Share Posted December 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, Cosmic Joe said: What exactly is your point here? You are all over the place in your attempts to put trans individuals down. He is generally all over the place while he relentlessly trolls the site with his, "I was so successful & you will all be made to acknowledge that I am always right eventually shtick", that he carpet bombs threads with. Utterly tragic & equally tedious. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts