Lance Berkman campaigns against allowing boys into girls' bathrooms

I have used it to describe bobby before. From his perspective it probably seems like my "go to". Maybe "go to" for him. It is entirely consistent that bobby thinks it's a "debate tactic" and I don't really mean it. If you want to get bobby to give a thirty minutes long condescending and incredibly inaccurate treatise about any random subject, just tell him he doesn't know anything about it.

 

With all due respect, Bobby, you are displaying breathtaking ignorance.

 

I had to look it up. Nobody's accused me in that way before. If Bobby keeps hearing it in separate conversations as 'a debate tactic' and yet I never hear it... well, what does that say?

I guess Bobby would say it's because he's always crushing his opponents so bad they have to resort to ad hominum attacks, while I've never been in that position. So, that's probably it.

 

Done.

I simply Googled it.

http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender.aspx

From the America Psychological Association, under the heading Is being Transsexual a mental disorder?:

A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder. For these individuals, the significant problem is finding affordable resources, such as counseling, hormone therapy, medical procedures and the social support necessary to freely express their gender identity and minimize discrimination. Many other obstacles may lead to distress, including a lack of acceptance within society, direct or indirect experiences with discrimination, or assault. These experiences may lead many transgender people to suffer with anxiety, depression or related disorders at higher rates than nontransgender persons.

 

SMH, in fairness I do bring a lot of this ridiculousness upon myself for continuing to discuss things with sophists and fools.

At least I never expect you guys to truly change.

 

The problem here is that employee sponsored healthcare plans are too generic and usually don't afford coverage for the listed types of treatment.

Even if the company is well intentioned and accommodating the shift in plans take a considerable amount of time let alone impacts on other employees.

This is simply an area where the lack of awareness and anticipation helps contribute to leaving transgendered people in an isolated mindset.

 

Yes, all 20 of us are wrong and you are right, Quixote. Tilt away at our madness.

 

The D&D tilts moderately to the left (skewed by a lot of far left-wingers), so it makes sense that Bobby would be largely on his own if the vocal minority didn't show up in a thread. That seems to be the case here. Obviously, this thread has largely devolved into a shouting match with the left ganging up against Bobby to marginalize his view, and he responding by fighting back.

 

Right... every other forum booby pollutes is left leaning too

 

I'm not saying he isn't stubborn, but there is a large amount of ganging up on people in the D&D in general. Do y'all really think you're going to change a guy's views by attacking him?

 

Well when presented by truths like how this isn't about men using women's restrooms he simply ignores it and continues his talking points then it makes it hard to have any kind of reasonable discussion with him.

 

Still hoping to see an answer from you, Bobby. Why do you approve of allowing discrimination against military vets?

 

80% of the DnD isn't about changing others views mostly because we know most of each others usual position. I try more with the newbies, but to each their own.

In this case, it's the classic DnD WWF takedown of the "evil foil". Sometimes I wonder why not just ignore them but the show is part of the game.

Probably most of his rep comes from the circus so it isn't like either side is a victim or ignorant of the not changing minds bit.

It just makes it hard to read in here sometimes.

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman


Sophists and fools.

 

Calling names when one doesn't have the answer or knows he's beat. It's sad, really.

Sticks and stones...

 

I wouldn't expect you to understand, but I'm not "calling names", I'm simply describing people. Those who constantly use logically fallacious arguments to advance a narrative are either doing so intentionally which would make them a sophist or are doing so unintentionally which would make them a fool.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delusional

 

No, not at all. Even if we succeeded, he should know better than to admit it. But, Bobby delivers a valuable service in offering opposition so I can exercise whatever arguments I have in my quiver. Sometimes I can get a bit annoyed by his attitude, but the fun part isn't really the piling on part, but in finding what I consider to be the best arguments. It's not my fault 19 other people are responding at the same time, or that more people won't argue the other side. If you know my posting history, I'll argue just as much when I'm in the minority, which happens often enough. If Bobby didn't like it, he probably wouldn't be the board's most prolific poster.

It probably does degrade the experience for you and others. I know I've come across protracted arguments between 'usual suspects' that have annoyed me. Since this is D&D, my best advice is to be part of the problem, find a subject you want to argue about, and beat it to death -- to the great annoyance of everyone else. Then let's start a thread about how terrible D&D is, even though everyone keeps coming back.

 

I must admit that I enjoy the chaos of the D&D most of the time. I was mostly just trying to slow down the circular nature of the conversation because it was getting boring, and Bobby is starting to sound like a broken record. No one on here is delusional. We all have our own opinions, and most of the time, the topics on here are subjective enough that there isn't a single right answer (which of course makes things more interesting).

Getting this thread back on topic, the premise behind the Berkman ad campaign has a strawman quality to it, but nonetheless, I find myself uncomfortable with some of the slippery slope consequences of the ordinance.

 

You're not using big words. It's not that hard to understand. You don't have facts on your side so you "describe" people in a way that makes you feel superior. It's childish no matter how you choose to spin it.

There simply is no proof to back up your narrative that there will all of a sudden be a slate of crimes against women and/or children in restrooms if this law passes. Similar laws are in place in many major cities across the country and there was no measurable uptick in crimes related to it. The ads are, by definition, a straw man argument and yet you continue to use that and only that in defending the opposition to this ordinance.