GUA Twitch

[Dolan]

@fightinfrenchman
It was some stuff based on scientific evidence. Some things about brain and gender, like sexual dimorphic traits and stuff. But of course, since Wiki trannies don't like a narrative that shows that there are brain differences between men and women, they just kept reverting it every day. You just realise at some point that's what their lives revolve around: fighting editing wars online. And you give up, because you have better things to do in life than winning editing wars on Wikipedia. Just let that shit say whatever biased narrative they want you to believe. Who cares.

[fightinfrenchman]

Yeah, you have much better things to do, like advocating for genocide of people you dislike online

[Dolan]

@gibson Yeah and they will fight you to death to make sure your edits disappear and their narrative wins. Because they don't have much to do with their free time. Except win editing wars on Wiki to make sure it spreads their version of the story, which promotes their point of view, not a neutral, fact-based one.

It would be interesting to see who are the most active and prolific, not how many of which kinds there are, btw. Because if someone writes a Wiki article on a chemistry topic, there's not going to be much controversy there, so no editing wars either. But if someone makes an edit in an article on human behaviours, that's when the online beehive starts glowing and activates itself.

[gibson]

@gibson Yeah and they will fight you to death to make sure your edits disappear and their narrative wins. Because they don't have much to do with their free time. Except win editing wars on Wiki to make sure it spreads their version of the story, which promotes their point of view, not a neutral, fact-based one.

It would be interesting to see who are the most active and prolific, not how many of which kinds there are, btw.

So now we know why you have an agenda against trans people, they beat you in editing wars on wikipedia

[kami_ryu]

-- deleted post --

[Dolan]

@gibson
Cheap bait. When you studied lots about some subjects, like the brain, at some point you read a Wiki article and realise it's incomplete or reflects an inaccurate picture.

So you try to update it based on the latest research. That's when the tranny brigade comes in, reverting everything because it doesn't promote their narrative.

As I said, at some point you stop giving a shit, because it's not your life mission to educate people with correct facts. If they get brainwashed by online propaganda, it's their fault.

[gibson]

@gibson
Cheap bait. When you studied lots about some subjects, like the brain, at some point you read a Wiki article and realise it's incomplete or reflects an inaccurate picture.

So you try to update it based on the latest research. That's when the tranny brigade comes in, reverting everything because it doesn't promote their narrative.

As I said, at some point you stop giving a shit, because it's not your life mission to educate people with correct facts. If they get brainwashed by online propaganda, it's their fault.

Okay, I'll stop being a dick. How do you know that the people who were reversing your edits were trans?

[Dolan]

Who do you think has the strong motivation to revert all neutral, fact-based edits about the brain and sex and replace them with points of view that promote a trans-positive narrative? A retired football player, a 60-year old granny who's into knitting?

[kami_ryu]

-- deleted post --

[Dolan]

Because they just described findings from recent research, really, nothing else. But since there was no particular spin that projected a positive image about trans, then it got deleted, reverted, etc.

And you know what, this is not even that bad. It's just amateurs goofing around. But it's actually academia that has been infiltrated by people with an agenda too. And they're looking for every opportunity to publish studies that promote their point of view.

Yeah, there's a lot of "cooked" science out there, because there's lots of things you can do with a set of data and a bit of statistics magic.

[fightinfrenchman]

Glad other people are starting to realize how awful Dolan is

[Dolan]

You're literally completely clueless about how the world works. I mean, you're spending most of your time at work looking for distractions. And you're trying to teach me how things actually work.

Just lol.

[fightinfrenchman]

You're spending your time talking about why trans and gay people are bad

[kami_ryu]

-- deleted post --

[gibson]

Who do you think has the strong motivation to revert all neutral, fact-based edits about the brain and sex and replace them with points of view that promote a trans-positive narrative? A retired football player, a 60-year old granny who's into knitting?

So lets get this straight. You have absolutely no idea whether or not they're trans(as if this was even relevant). You've assigned them this identity(even though its statistically unlikely) because in your mind it gives you an excuse to dismiss their argument. It's always been clear to everyone here but you that you're in a bubble and don't even consider ideas outside of it. This is likely to be another example of that. The way you've phrased this entire scenario just makes it painfully obvious.

[Dolan]

@fightinfrenchman
That's your understanding of what I'm saying. I am for an evidence-based approach, devoid of any spin.

You want facts to confirm your virtue-signalling, predefined attitude.

[fightinfrenchman]

@Goodspeed Remember moderating a thread about "Dino DNA" because it was a shitpost but then thinking it's okay to just leave up posts where someone calls people "faggots" and "trannies"? Is that still a good idea or what?

[gibson]

That's your understanding of what I'm saying. I am for an evidence-based approach, devoid of any spin.

You're really arguing for an evidence based approach devoid of spin, when the past few posts all you've been doing is spinning a negative agenda about trans people with 0 evidence that the people who you are talking about are actually trans? You are actually unbelievable how you think you're some prophet of the Truth when you are guilty of doing the exact thing you're criticizing people of.

[Dolan]

what exactly is a trans agenda? per se?

Today? Establishing the view that there are no actual men and women, it's all just "gender fluidity". And they can settle for whatever flavour of the month they identify with. And of course, this has to be supported by scientific evidence. So better put a self-serving spin on every piece of information published. Even engage in emotional blackmail with the research community to get them on your side. If they refuse to cave in and stick to their academic ivory tower, then start defamation wars online, to paint a "hateful" picture of them.

[fightinfrenchman]

Remember that Dolan's original argument was that by not calling gay people faggots you're hurting them by not helping them grow their character through adversity.

[Dolan]

That's your understanding of what I'm saying. I am for an evidence-based approach, devoid of any spin.

You're really arguing for an evidence based approach devoid of spin, when the past few posts all you've been doing is spinning a negative agenda about trans people with 0 evidence that the people who you are talking about are actually trans? You are actually unbelievable how you think you're some prophet of the Truth when you are guilty of doing the exact thing you're criticizing people of.

Do you really believe that people who have a strong motivation to promote trans-positive agenda on Wikipedia are not trans or involved in any way? Why are you ignoring and skirting around the argument I made? Maybe because you don't have any counterargument, so better just hold my point of view to an impossible standard, you want me to track down their IPs, track down their physical addresses and bring statistical evidence that particular people writing on Wikipedia must be trans if they support trans points of view.

What happened to just using your brain and intuition? Do you really believe people spreading trans agenda on Wikipedia are black football players? Or Jewish rabis? It's called motive for a reason, even in a legal court.

[fightinfrenchman]

Do you think maybe that you a motive to do the opposite since you're transphobic?

[Dolan]

Remember that Dolan's original argument was that by not calling gay people faggots you're hurting them by not helping them grow their character through adversity.

I said that's what lots of people believe. I described a piece of folk psychology.

[fightinfrenchman]

@Community Team Next time I interact with Dolan, give me a one day ban to stop me from doing it again, it's clearly a total waste of time, thanks

[Dolan]

Do you think maybe that you a motive to do the opposite since you're transphobic?

That's a word defined in your culture which is by definition biased. It assumes you cannot hold any negative point of view on a category of people, or else you are bad.

Like for example, if you believe most football players are stupid, then you must have a phobia for football players. This kind of -phobia constructed terms are meant to project a negative connotation on anyone who holds any kind of view that is not positive about a certain category. As if you shouldn't be able to think or hold any view that is not positive about that category. Or else, you must be phobic.