DrugsBunny

Your statement suggests there's a need for an analytical conversation regarding whether the Jews should be hate targets. The subject matter has no merit, so even entertaining this narrative is obviously for clicks. You think Lex, just because he has a calm demeanor, actually platformed this Nazi mental patient intending to carefully parse a delicate social matter? Seriously absurd.

Maybe I should have been more explicit in the point of this thread being that Tim Pool's audience of supposed right-leaning centrists is still far right enough to admonish Tim for not capitulating to the anti-Semitism, I don't care that he platformed Kanye, of course he did. Holier than thou vibes abundant here. If stating basic facts is too polarizing then maybe politics in itself is too complicated for you as well. Yes, you saw Leo post that in the response above yours so you bit it as well, even though I do not take issue with the platforming per se. The point of the thread is pointing out that any audience of conservatives will be upset if the host does not capitulate to anti-Semitism.

My life seriously needs to change already. I just woke up from a very alarming sleep paralysis hallucination. About 5 months ago I started having these incredibly realistic, terrifying sleep paralysis hallucinations. An entity said my name as if it knew who I was. There is NO WAY these are not real entities, just because you hallucinate them does not mean they don't exist. The hallucination is just what aligns your reality with theirs. Sometimes I have pleasant entities talk to me. Most times they are malevolent. The most recent one was this evil lady and her talking hounds from hell telling me that they are going to put me in a worse simulation than the one I'm living and said "this one never ends". I know there is a good chance that they are just malevolent entities that are lying to me but I also have an unshakable fear that they have the keys to my overlying reality or something. Long story short, I have decided I need to have an awakening. I have never tried 5-MeO-DMT before, but I think I have no other choice at this point. I just want to experience myself as the creator, understand why I have nothing to fear, and move on with my life. There is some apprehension of course, I fear taking it might actually wake me up to the hell reality that these entities speak of. Please do your best to convince me that 5-MeO-DMT is amazing and persuade me into taking it without fear. Thank you. (I'm also concerned about safety precautions. How do people take this with certainty they won't lose their minds and wreck their home or something)

Lmao. Sometimes I'll be playing chess and get one-upped by an intelligent move I didn't consider, reflexively I will feel a bit stupid, but I can always rely on comments like this to give me reassurance that it could be a lot worse.

This obviously contradicts what Leo says. He claims that if you are murdered you stay in a dark limbo state after death for 1000+ years, same with suicide or any accidental death? Apparently the only safe why to die to assure a "rebirth" and not hell is to die in your sleep. Why does he say this? How would he know?

I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to actually care about anything involving Destiny or Mr Girl. The "bridge nuke" was inevitable; the only reason Destiny was favorable towards Mr Girl is because Vaush dismissed him as a deranged pedophile, but since Destiny childishly hates anyone who holds him to account for his asinine conduct (such as Vaush), Desinty used every modicum of mental gymnastics to find the positives in Mr Girl, when in reality he was always a deranged pedophile. Vaush predicted this bridge nuke ages ago, shit's too funny. I will now be given warning points by @Carl-Richard for saying something bad about Destiny. This happened about a week ago as well. Crazy power tripping.

@Leo Gura Some questions about that: Would you describe any sort of resistance at all as fear (insecurities, mild aversions, dislikes, negative perceptions)? Or is literal fear as in you're afraid of something the fear you are referring to? Why is fear what blocks off divine consciousness? Is that just a metaphysical necessity that couldn't be any other way? Or did the intelligent source intentionally contrive reality to be that way arbitrarily, and it could be otherwise?

Cool insights. A lot of people describe it like an epically intense roller coaster through metaphysics that is so intense they don't want to take it again for at least a year. Would you describe it like that? Do you plan on taking it again? Why did you take such a large dose for your first trip? I've heard of people going insane on lower doses.

@integral You must not have read the vitriolic tantrum I was responding to. Lmao.

@newbee This is a bit awkward. Having enraged you to anxiously gather your trusty allies of likeminded knuckle-dragging I'm honestly a bit hesitant to provoke you any further, as I've clearly struck a deep nerve by exposing your intolerance for trans people. Swing and a miss! MINOR complications are common, but actual issues that impede the integrity of the surgery are exceptionally rare. If the complications were actually significant then the regret rate for trans people would be higher than what it is. (It's really low) https://www.issm.info/sexual-health-qa/is-it-common-for-transgender-people-to-regret-gender-affirmation-surgery It's deeply concerning that you actually believed this was a valid refutation to trans acceptance. I pray the remedial education that victimized you has offered significant recompense for their failures. Wait, you mean to tell me that suicidal ideation for a group of people who on average transition at age 25 experience the most suicidal ideation at the age 32-35, completely in lockstep with normal suicidality rates? Holy shit. Okay, maybe I'm being a bit harsh; after all, I'm sure it must be painstakingly difficult for you to conjure a cogent worldview with the taste of Jordan Peterson's ejaculate ingrained into memory as thoroughly as it must be for someone who would proudly debase themselves by posting this asinine transphobic drivel. My apologies, going forward I'll be sure to use the kid-gloves with the likes of you.

@Leo Gura Is it even possible to teach the levels of consciousness you've reached when it's taken you years of highly unique and devoted spiritual practice? Is the new kind of infinity just like God, but more controllable, and more resided in a sort of form that you're calling 'alien'? Just wondering what the main distinction is; I'm seriously fascinated and want to know more.

You said "so it's okay if 1 in 5 tans people regret their surgery?" and I showed that the number is less than 3%. That's embarrassing. Doesn't seem like an emotionally proportionate response considering all I did was agree with you that @Danioover9000 is not even worth speaking to.

@eggopm3 Swing and a miss. https://www.issm.info/sexual-health-qa/is-it-common-for-transgender-people-to-regret-gender-affirmation-surgery Yeah, he's not even worth addressing.

Thankfully there are statistics on this. I imagine you'd be quite devastated by the epiphany of how bafflingly gullible you are if it ever occurred you. You have my deepest pity. Yes, every form of surgery has people who regret having it done, including knee reconstruction surgery, breast augmentation, facelift, back surgery. For instance, corrective surgery for spinal deformity has a 21% regret rate. https://spinalnewsinternational.com/one-in-five-older-adults-regret-undergoing-corrective-surgery-for-adult-spinal-deformity/ Sex reassignment surgery does not have a disproportionately higher rate of regret compared to typical surgeries one could have done. But since trans people make you so uncomfortable, as you live in a horrendously unevolved state, knuckles dragging on the concrete, you gleefully bookmarked a ton of politically selected instances of trans people regretting their surgery, including a video from Blaire White, lmao. Big yikes.

Another misguided victim of blind submission to the undue authority they've haphazardly lent to Leo. It's not even an intelligent nor difficult point to refute that you're making... In actuality, a youth with gender dysphoria is afforded extensive psychological screening to determine the necessity for what is clearly a life changing decision. Once it is unambiguously determined that such a person would benefit from surgery, they are first given hormonal therapy which temporarily impedes puberty so the kid can later on make a more informed decision as to whether the actual surgery is something they are going to want. If not, they just stop taking the puberty blockers and literally no harm is done. Reverse surgery is also possible worst case scenario... There are statistics verifying that people with gender dysphoria who have surgery far more often than not experience more comfort with their new identity than had they not transitioned. You obviously don't care about these undeniable facts because they interfere with your overriding desire to reject trans people. Saying "we should not accept trans people because there might be some nebulous unforeseeable consequence" is just an expression of your prejudice towards them. Try saying the same thing towards any other marginalized group. No shit, being cautious is never unwise, but your idea of cautious is just denying trans people the pursuit of their true identity in favor of hopefully avoiding some unforeseen consequence that you can't even prove exists. It's not surprising you fail to actually demonstrate explicitly where the consequence lies. Not surprising at all. Next he's gonna pretend that he isn't condoning the conservative position but just emphasizing its non-bigoted perspective while habitually giving unremitting deference to Leo's authority, as if going for the next appointed moderator position.

@EternalForest Nobody considers themselves a bad person. Trans people make you uncomfortable, that obviously isn't good for society. If you aren't willing to admit that people who are conscientious enough to accept trans people fully are better for society than those who are too weak to, you're just being dishonest.

Yes, you're a bad person if you're anti-trans, just like you're a bad person if you're anti-black, anti-woman or anti-gay. Leo wants to have patience for such people, and perhaps a bit of patience is warranted, but what even is bad if we're not basing it relative to what's good. You're certainly being "good" by upholding outdated values through your childlike prejudice.

You can call me naziphobic and pretend it's a bad thing.

You would have to demonstrate the clear unambiguous connection between the two, which you have not done. You're just expecting me to believe that this phenomenon has to do with trans people and then ascribing a lack of holistic thinking to anyone who can't see the connection. As I see it, this phenomenon is obviously the result of social isolation becoming a more feasible survival strategy. The internet, remote jobs, the increase of online streamers who can entertain and thus facilitate parasocial relationships with otherwise lonely people, these are all things that have diminished the necessity for people to leave the house to socialize. It's obviously far more plausible that stuff like this is to blame for men being lonely rather than trans people becoming less stigmatized. I mean this is just common sense, it's seriously bizarre that you would blame trans acceptance for this phenomenon rather than the obvious culprit I've just described.

@Leo Gura You still haven't given a single example where the expanded feasibility of trans youth transitioning has posed any real threat towards cis children. Instead of pussyfooting around the issue, actually show your math and provide an example where a cis kid is harmed because we have lessened the stigma against becoming trans. All you have said is that they are being influenced by culture, and I'm sitting here like "uh... yeah, that's the point". Where does the actual HARM take place? You got nothing.

Misgendering and harassing Elliot Page is transphobic. This is a totally separate issue that has nothing to do with teens being afforded the means to transition to their true gender identity. Demonstrate the connection between the two, otherwise this is just blatant dishonesty.

@Leo Gura Can't articulate his position? For the sake of brevity the was really no necessity to recap his position. I notice you like to throw around the term "gas-lighting" but would you acknowledge that I've been gaslit with your response here? His position is that trans youth being allowed to transition means that cis children will harm themselves due to newfound feasibility in changing ones gender. Not really that complicated. If I wanted to gaslight you, I would respond to this by saying "the fact that you can't actually give examples where the harm would occur" says more about you than about this matter, but I can see you simply opted not to for the sake of brevity. If you want this position to be respected you should provide an example where this would actually hurt cis kids, but I imagine you'd be pretty hard-pressed to do so. I'm saying JP is a transphobe because he engages in transphobic rhetoric, as you have acknowledged by saying his Elliot Page drama took things too far. It's very strange that you aren't willing to acknowledge how this unambiguously puts him in the transphobic category.

My dude's breaking out the literal dictionary. *rolls eyes* This does not take into account the way the word grifter has been used over the past 3 to 4 years. Definitions change due to the way people use the words, for instance, the word "literally" for years was used as a means of emphasis without meaning something is "literally" true before the dictionary updated it. My definition is derived from the far more valid source of being tuned in to modern discourse, whereas your definition is a haphazard conformity to an outdated dictionary. Congrats. The lack of self awareness here deserves some kind of trophy, and I may have defiled my own integrity by affording you my attention any further, but I'll take the hit. Do you really not see the hypocrisy in saying I can't deem your temperament unnecessary after you said the following: Your response is actually the more egregious offender in terms of who is demanding someone refine their free-speech, whereas mine simply said your tone was unnecessary and never states outright that you can't say what you've said. Yikes.

They said he was a "grifter" which does not necessarily mean he doesn't believe what he says, more-so that his main motivation towards spouting his rhetoric is based on material incentives and that his perspective is heavily influenced by whatever fares best for his branding. This is pretty dumb. The emotional hounding you're subjecting this person to is unnecessary because their statement calling him a grifter is more of a speculative assessment based on his behavior rather than a falsifiable claim that warrants strict supporting evidence. Not to say that casting speculative aspersions never needs evidence, I'm saying the temperament of the their remark does not warrant your demands for some nebulous onrush of 'proof' which likely wouldn't even be accepted if it were provided. The evidence is blatantly apparent to anyone who's willing to contend with it. The dude harasses trans people on twitter and complains that he got his account suspended. Do you really think any person who isn't compelled by a necessity to uphold their brand could possibly believe that they are being victimized by not being allowed to harass trans people. Obvious grifter behavior. I tend to enjoy reading your perspectives here, but this was just embarrassing to read.

When people say "wokeism", an embarrassingly large percentage of the time they are simply talking about black people, women, gays, or trans people being featured in movies or TV shows, or twitter censoring people saying the N word or harassing trans people. The thread doesn't warrant a serious response because without further context it's too likely this person merely takes issue with these innocuous social trends.