MovieChat Forums > cyguration
cyguration (3881)
Posts
First Half Was Terrible, Second-Half Was Awesome; Iris Was Miscast
Let's be honest, most average women would love to be Choi's slave...
Why Was Wu Jing Depicted As Such A Beta Male In This?
Anyone feel John Cena and his subplot was more engaging than the main story?
Why Do Driving Movies Front-Load The Movie With The Best Chase Scene?
A surrealistic prequel to Falling Down....
Quintessentially 90s But Extremely Prescient
Started so strong but kind of petered out....
Fascinating film about the MPLA but it felt fractured...
Actual espionage...
View all posts >
Replies
<blockquote>I also made no observation about whether that's good or not good for society.</blockquote>
So you think people getting divorced at relatively the same rates, whilst marriages are in a double-decline for marriage-age demographics over a near 30-year period, is healthy for society?
<blockquote>or in a civil partnership </blockquote>
They can have the civil partnership without marriage, especially since you don't think marriage is important... right?
<blockquote>There is not a singular definition of marriage. </blockquote>
It was intended originally, according to the Bible, to be a holy matrimony between man and woman. Anything else is just a variation of a civil union.
<blockquote>I fail to see how 'religious principles' would be inherently anti-migration. They might not be. </blockquote>
They are, since Poland is majority Roman Catholic, and they do not favour inter-faith mingling; most migrants are Muslim.
<blockquote>You specifically spoke about the move into WW3</blockquote>
When drafts are enacted, who do you think will be called to war and how will it impact the family unit?
<blockquote>Do you think this constitutes fair-minded, moral conduct?</blockquote>
Asking questions, in good faith, is never immoral.
<blockquote>It has nothing to do with scientific approach you claim you stick to.</blockquote>
It does; anyone willfully wanting to mutilate appendages is either psychotic or delusional. No two ways around that.
<blockquote>What about those who decide to never undergo any surgeries or choose only top surgery</blockquote>
It's still a mutilation fetish; women cutting off their breasts do not get them back, especially teenage girls who later change their minds and decide they might want to have kids. Except, even if they change their minds they become permanently infertile because HRT works as chemical castration; it's still a form of self-mutilation, which is not normal nor healthy. There are no positive outcomes from permanent self-mutilation.
<blockquote> I wonder, when you see a person in a wheelchair...</blockquote>
We recognise that they were always <b>meant</b> to walk, because that's how they were designed.
<blockquote>people with androgen insensitivity syndrome do not have ovaries and a uterus but they are psychologically female.</blockquote>
No, you're talking about an extremely tiny percentage of people with a genetic endocrinological disorder. That's different from people choosing to mutilate their body.
<blockquote>says who??</blockquote>
Natural selection (and the 41% of them with a propensity for suicide): https://www.medicaldaily.com/41-transgender-people-have-attempted-suicide-how-discrimination-hits-them-all-angles-268218
<blockquote>you are dismissing the epigenetic factor in embryo development</blockquote>
It has no bearing on cognitive stimuli since hippocampal development is too nascent during the gestation period, thus lacking synaptic feedback of sensory perception. That is closer to postnatal development.
<blockquote>All you do is mock them.</blockquote>
I actually haven't mocked anyone.
<blockquote>who are you by profession?</blockquote>
Mostly under NDA, but it crosses into the medical science field.
Yeah the monster design here was something straight out of a John Carpenter film -- extremely inventive and extremely creepy.
And yeah, same here about that claw scene through the door. That was one of the creepiest and most unsettling scenes I've seen in a movie in decades. Yes, decades.
Goes to show that with a competent director and some good special effects, even a simple scene of a boy in a chair with a finger reaching through the door can be absolutely terrifying.
I thought the location was perfect -- looked post-apoc. Sure, places in Michigan like Detroit or New Orleans would have been just as good for looking like a completely rundown and tore-up cityscape, but the location they chose was pretty good nonetheless. Definitely made it feel remote and scary even if they only used a few locations.
<blockquote>I didn't say it improved.</blockquote>
Right, so you concede my point that it is a major detriment to society. Thank you for agreeing with me.
<blockquote>The same gay people would still be gay whether or not they could get married or not.</blockquote>
Precisely. You agree with me again, that there is no reason for them to be married since it changes nothing, but only diminishes the definition of marriage between a man and a woman for the sake of starting a family. Glad we're finally coming to the same terms here.
<blockquote>No reason to think open relationships cause it.</blockquote>
They only lead to chaos:
https://www.e-counseling.com/articles/open-relationships-do-not-work/
https://medium.com/the-knowledge-of-freedom/the-five-main-reasons-open-relationships-so-often-fail-11d31432c386
<blockquote>So the Greece and Poland birth rates have... nothing to do with a lack of religion then.</blockquote>
Lack of maintaining principles, upholding the border, and balancing the economy due to leadership corruption spawns from a lack of maintaining religious principles from the top down.
<blockquote>What "natural order" of geopolitics are you referring to that is being disrupted, exactly? </blockquote>
The global attacks on the nuclear family unit.
<blockquote>can you tell me if you think it's morally acceptable for someone to accuse someone else of being a pedophile on the back of no evidence?</blockquote>
That is neither here nor there, given accusations are generally a reaction, and reactions are based on a platform of contention. The contention determines why the accusation takes place.
<blockquote>Why don't you watch an interview of someone who transitioned and never detransitioned for a change? Cause what you do here is a cognitive distortion called confirmation bias. </blockquote>
Because those are people who have a fetish for body-mutilation. No amount of surgery will give a woman working testicles, or a man working ovaries.
<blockquote> transgender people finally feel right and comfortable.</blockquote>
No, they do not. In fact, they live with mutilated genitals for the rest of their days, which constantly produce infections, fungus, and a never-ending smell of fecal matter, which is what oftentimes leads them to suicide, as explained here:
https://media.scored.co/post/pFjYMDe51L5f.png
<blockquote>You obviously have not read the studies I added. </blockquote>
I did, which is why I noted they were based on epigenetic stimuli, not innate biological stimuli. All of them were post-natal EEGs, which is the equivalent of saying a heroin addict was born a heroin addict based on the changes to their physiology after being addicted for many years. It's an antithetical approach to actual longitudinal control data.
<blockquote>there are cisgender women who have never experienced periods but they are still psychologically women. </blockquote>
They still have ovaries and a uterus. Men do not, and never will.
<blockquote>you will inevitably dismiss those abundant data that prove you wrong </blockquote>
Not at all. I am always asking for data sources and peer reviewed studies on more controversial topics to examine and discuss them. That is the only way forward to understanding. If you have data that proves me wrong, I will always examine it to see if it actually does, or if it's just conjecture based on anecdotes or potentially premature conclusions spawned empirical data.
There are two parts to this film -- the first half with Mandy, and then the second half.
The second half is a trip, and it's why it's probably my favourite ever Nicholas Cage film.
<blockquote>So if 20 people get married, 10 divorce. Now it's 10 people getting married, 5 divorce. There's no massive increase of divorces. </blockquote>
If the same amount of people are getting divorced while fewer people are getting married, how does that help improve social cohesion or improving the family unit dynamic?
<blockquote>And it goes back to my original point that I don't recall anyone saying anywhere that everyone should be gay.</blockquote>
No one said everyone should be gay, the point is that fewer normal families and more gay marriages equates to disruption in cultural standards. You cannot build or maintain a civilisation that way.
<blockquote>Why do you give a fuck? </blockquote>
Societal collapse.
<blockquote>So what's the difference in practice </blockquote>
There isn't one. Both are bad for the people involved and for society at large.
<blockquote>How do you explain that?
</blockquote>
Greece is going through migrant upheaval:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3427417/Migrant-crisis-35-times-worse-year-ago-2-000-day-arrive-Greek-islands-despite-perilous-winter-seas.html
And Poland is going through a cultural crisis:
https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/03/31/poland-is-facing-a-housing-crisis-but-politicians-are-offering-the-same-failed-solutions/
<blockquote>Neither of these things, if they happen, have anything to do with 'godlessness'.
</blockquote>
They absolutely do, since it's kakistocrats looking to disrupt the natural order for their own gain. Nothing Godly about those actions.
Yes, I've read your posts and notice the patterns quite well, so I thank you for that.
And absolutely.... it has allowed me to resharpen some debate tools that I left dormant for many years. And has also allowed me to brush up a bit on my tactics.
But I'm glad you recognise the tactics and already know how to spot them with ease. I'm sure it makes it very easy for you to spot them and counter them when you encounter them in other parts of life.
<blockquote> Now, do you really think no one ever tried to treat transgender people with antipsychotics (even though they didn't have any of the symptoms above)?</blockquote>
Brainwashing isn't psychosis, so anti-psychotics would be the wrong prescription.
<blockquote>Those who are really transgender never regret the transition and live their whole life like this.</blockquote>
There is no "really transgender", because as I said -- no one who is born male has ever had ovaries, a uterus or a menstrual cycle. They psychologically do not know how it physiologically feels to be a woman, and vice versa. A woman cannot be transgender because she was never born with testicles, does not know what an erection feels like, and does not produce testosterone the same way, it's why there is such a strong reaction when they do get on hormone treatment and
there are averse affects, like here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2b2kbY7rHE
<blockquote>you simplify it all way too much.</blockquote>
No, you keep missing the point. All of your brain development happens on top of your gonad development; even in your links they admit gonad development happens first. Intersex individuals are not transgender individuals, and those articles are purposely mixing the two up to confuse readers like yourself.
Masculinity/feminity is a direct result of gonadotropin, which is directly impacted by the development of the gonads, which controls testosterone/estrogen, ovulation/sperm count/menstrual cycles.
<blockquote>EEG of male-to-female transgender people is similar</blockquote>
Epigenetic observations are not biological observations. The data is completely worthless without fetal EEG control data.
<blockquote> The fact that you call dishonest someone who is unwilling to share their trauma is really concerning and speaks for itself</blockquote>
Opposite is true. Pursuing delusions with the support of others only harms themselves. Dealing with trauma is the answer, not mutilation.
View all replies >