Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

ekbeats

Members
  • Posts

    1,836
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1,106 Excellent

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Buffalo Bills

Recent Profile Visitors

557 profile views
  1. Yeah but it’s transitory. So we’ve got that going for us.
  2. Once again I used the word dismissive, not supportive. I have no doubt he’s a good person.
  3. So the consensus is that I should get suspended for calling out a post where someone says that "some rapes are the price we should be willing to pay" for a progressive policy. In a thread about a 14 year old girl getting raped and sodomized. Great, got it. 👍 I like Ivan but he was way out of line with that statement. It was dumb and it most definitely was dismissive of one of the worst crimes imaginable. Yet only one poster has criticized him, while you and sho direct your outrage at me for calling it what it was. Stop tilting at windmills. You look foolish.
  4. The dirtbag finally apologized. In the media business this is called the Friday afternoon dump. Loudoun County superintendent apologizes, board member resigns as backlash grows over alleged sexual assaults
  5. I've explained it several times and it's really quite simple. Allowing biological males access to what were previously women's only facilities increases the risk of sexual assaults and voyeurism. If you can't understand why there's an increased risk then I'm afraid I can't help you.
  6. Exactly. But nowhere, nowhere did I say the policy would be abused solely by transgenders. Whether the Loudoun rapist was trans or not is kind of irrelevant. It is the flawed policy that facilitated a biological male raping a girl.
  7. https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/800886-revisiting-the-issue-of-allowing-biological-males-to-use-womens-bathrooms-and-the-loudoun-county-rape-case/?do=findComment&comment=23649187
  8. Because people complained it was incendiary. Are you implying that the title was different than what I said? Next time I'll take a picture of it for you and preserve the evidence. Nowhere in my original title did I mention the word transgender, and I pointed that out in at least one post in this thread.
  9. Perfect example of Liberal bias... This AP article on today's stabbing of a Conservative UK Minister is at the top of the Drudge Report. The article doesn't mention that the captured perp was Somali, probably the most important fact of the murder and one that was known well before the article was published. But the article made damn sure to mention this: "The slaying came five years after another MP, Jo Cox, was murdered by a far-right extremist in her small-town constituency."
  10. By the way, where in this thread did I ever make this solely about the dangers of transgenders committing the crimes? I said from jump street it was about the increased risk of exposure to women presented by biological males being able to use women's facilities. So sharpen up your reading skills @Terminalxylem. You ASSumed that I was arguing that transgender males were more apt to commit sexual crimes. Yet another example of you thinking you are an unbiased scientist, when in actuality you are just as much guided by your biases as the Conservative extremists you deplore. Will you learn from it? I doubt it. But you will somehow convince yourself that you were right the whole time.
  11. I read them. Wish you would read the thread and comprehend the points I've been making.
  12. Boy you guys are unbelievable. "You have no proof." I provide 34 examples. You start picking apart each example, forgetting that the overarching theme to your original objection was that these things don't occur with any regularity, as if going from 34 to 31 somehow negates the 31 examples. But hey, I get it, that's what you do. You are constitutionally incapable of seeing the forest through the trees. I'm actually surprised you didn't challenge the source - that's another popular play in the Liberal handbook. Here's the deal with these Target examples. Years ago Target came out with very controversial changes to its gender specific restrooms and fitting rooms. They first allowed transgenders to use any of their existing women's and men's bathrooms - whatever they felt comfortable with. They also changed their separate women's and men's fitting rooms into unisex rooms. Both policies were enacted due to the transgender issues. The Target controversy was what originally started the other thread 5 years ago. Conservatives in that thread argued that those changes would make it easier for peeping Tom's to violate women. An example was cited exactly as outlined above where a man took an underskirt photo. That increased risk to women is EXACTLY what I'm talking about.@Terminalxylem - are you prepared to argue that having separate women's and men's facilities has the same degree of exposure to this type of crime? I bet you'll come back asking me to find studies showing data to support the obvious.
×
  • Create New...