Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 2)

[benji]

Checking back in on this thread: https://www.resetera.com/threads/the-guardian-florida-woman-who-fatally-shot-man-to-not-face-charges-due-to-%E2%80%98stand-your-ground%E2%80%99-law.1625491/page-3#post-160137121

I mean, I can understand the kneejerk response to state a dispute like this shouldn't be resolved with a gun, but this shouldn't be the case to die on that hill IMO.

Black people are currently being lynched, along with generally disappearing and facing violence from an inherently racist police state in the US. Thus, these takes from non-black people whether they're fellow citizens or from other countries are unintentionally arguing that a terrorized population should remain defenseless.

In a sane country it's highly illegal for her to have a gun in this situation to begin with. This is compounded by an irrational self-defense law that is built on the same foundation as the irrational laws that allowed her to bring a gun to a walmart.

Cheerleading for bad laws because you like the outcome is very dangerous.

Without a firearm, this black woman would most certainly have been assaulted and potentially beaten to death by an unhinged psychopath. I'm sure she is keenly aware of the sad state of affairs. However, at some point you need to soberly reflect on the material reality of your situation and prepare. I'm sure being black, a woman, and living in Florida in 2026 did a lot to inform her decision. I don't consider it irrational for POC, women, or other disaffected groups to arm themselves. Especially because the USA and all its laws and institutions act asymmetrically against those people with no reprisal. So you can wish in one hand and shit in the other for all I'm concerned.

If there's opportunity to dismiss or shit on a black perspective, this site will not pass it up.

I'm getting the distinct impression that the detractors of the black woman's rightful self-defense would rather she'd be seriously maimed or put to death so that it's another black body they can moral grandstand over.

Really illustrates how desensitized a lot of people are to the violence directed at black people that the implication of harm is seen as the default and preferable outcome.

In a sane country, racism wouldn't exist, and thus some Black people wouldn't feel the need to arm themselves in a country specifically built on their exploitation.

Which country on Earth has figured out how to stop white people from being on one? Yours?

Asking Era to empathize with a Black person? Who also had the audacity to be born as a filthy American?

Lol, you have a better chance of dancing naked on the White House lawn.

"Barbaric", "savage", etc is this the 60s? Even my local MAGA thugs don't speak like that.

What's next "jungle" comments?

This really should be the key take away, and not "why is a black woman in the most nazi state of the country armed and defending against a white man threatening her".

If I have to recognize the racial dynamics, how can I pretend to be superior?

smh at primitive. I maintain that the even the most delusional MAGA folks in my town stay clear of these words when expressing displeasure with a Black American.

I understand why Black people might feel like they need to carry a gun in the US. I'd argue that a very large factor behind that is that people are allowed to bring guns to public places. My comment is about how two bad laws combined to make this situation happen. In my country, you'd be liable to be sent to the penn for bringing a gun to a walmart. As it turns out, on average, there are significantly less guns at the walmart.

Are we forgetting that SYG and the so-called "Castle doctrine" are so heavily steeped in racism that basically every prominent case that centers on their invocation involves a white person shooting a not white person?

You didn't answer the question, so I'm going to assume that, no, that you haven't figured out how to deal with racism yet in your country.

And no one who is upset at foreigners who also haven't figured out racism completely and conveniently ignoring concern about the safety of the Black woman is forgetting the racial basis of these laws. We're upset because the knee jerk reactions centering foreigners' feelings on how barbaric they find America and how they would never come here flattened the dynamics altogether and served to equivocate both parties involved in the dispute.

It's basically just in-group signaling and flaunting one's supposed superiority. I'm glad your white-ass countries don't have guns. Good for you. Black Americans don't get the luxury of pretending they're white Europeans.

💯 We don't have the luxury of forgetting how we're targeted for violence in general, whether in the US or anywhere else.

I think this is a pretty fucked up and sad situation. A guy got killed over an argument for a parking spot. Even if it's justified under the law, that's still really sad.

Fuck framing it this way. What's sad is that black women have to live in fear and defend themselves against unhinged bigots this way

I'm doing no such thing. I'm not interested in that conversation at all, which is why I didn't respond to that aspect of your post. Has any country solved white nonsense? I'm also not European, and I don't live in a "white-ass country" (unless the US is also a "white-ass country").

My country also has a distressing gun culture and the most (in)famous self-defense case in my country involves a white man shooting and killing an indigenous person and getting acquitted, which is the intended function of these laws. I include that for posterity in case you still think my intention in this threat was to tell you about how my country is better than yours.

The "knee jerk reaction" here is that it's good when someone gets shot at at a walmart over a parking space. It's very short-term thinking.

No Western country has solved it, which is the point. So many people across this forum boast about how "civilized" their countries they can't even be bothered to dismantle systems of oppression because "at least we don't have guns." It's trite and reactionary, pure neoliberal, chauvinist drivel, and serves to do nothing but center themselves when they aren't fucking relevant to the conversation. Okay, you're safe in your little Western outpost; who gives a fuck? This woman was not safe at the time, and yet the non-Americans in all of their wonderous lack of "barbarism" and civil superiority and "concern for human rights" can't even be glad a minority made it out safe. Tells the Black folks on this forum everything they need to know.

And yes, the US is a white-ass country, not just demographically but socially and legally. It is white supremacist and has been by design since its inception, and considering your country has white people murdering natives and getting away scot free still, so is yours.

You all also keep framing the conflict in a disingenuous, untruthful way. She didn't kill him over dispute over who should take a parking space. She killed him because he was a bigger, more physically threatening person who is in a higher caste than she is stepping to her after threatening her multiple times beforehand, and he decided- against all reason- to approach her even with the gun out. The initial catalyst of the argument is not the reason for the conclusion! The reason for the conclusion is that this white army vet (probably a likely war criminal) decided to continuously threaten someone he thought he could coerce and threaten! And yet some of y'all seem to feel more sorry for him than y'all do for her!

Straight up. A lot of people showing their entitled, privileged ass in this thread.

I agree with the sentiment here that for us not living or grown up in the US it's just unfathomable to imagine random people waking around with guns and people getting shot dead by civilians.

How are people not scared to death of each other in the us?

Your privileged inability to understand the contradictions of American life are duly noted and yet wholly unnecessary.

Imagine knowing a 10th of the shit that goes on in this country and telling Black folks not to stay strapped.

Black folks are literally disappearing and being found in trees right now.

We live in a country that genocided the indigenous population, enslaved Africans, wrote laws to erase us, and commits state sanctioned violence every day.

You just kinda learn to live with anxiety.

The primary reason I wouldn't leave the U.S. is because at least a lot of folks here get it. Living in a faux "color blind" country would feel like prison to me.

Canada might be close enough. Still exploring it.

Which leads to even more virulent antiblackness from what I've seen since those other countries & populations have yet to address how deeply embedded that thinking is within their societies.

I think you're shadowboxing here or at least using my posts as a proxy to argue with someone else because this isn't really responsive to anything I said. If what you want to talk about is the US vs the world narrative or whatever, that's your prerogative, but that's not what I want to talk about, which is why I haven't been talking about it. Similarly, you telling me my country is a white supremacist state that lets white people get away with shooting dark skinned people isn't the gotcha that you think it is. For one thing, I am a professional advocate and the primary target of my advocacy is my own government. Second, I just told you my government enables white people to shoot natives. How can I be surprised by a fact I just told you?

The subject that interests me here is that there are two legal frameworks that are indisputably bad that produced an outcome that some people nonetheless consider to be good. The "good" outcome doesn't make the law that brought us here good, and in fact these laws mostly harm the type of people they just happened to protect in this situation.

Your first observation in the thread was that "in a sane country, it's highly illegal for her to have a gun in this situation to begin with." In response to me bringing up the racial component of the issue, you said you understood the rationality of her having a gun (which in turn somewhat contradicts your diagnosis of insanity), but then went on to say once more what happens in your country, being that "you'd be liable to be sent to the penn for bringing a gun into a Walmart."

You fundamentally began this conversation with an inherent implication that your country is sane because of its strict gun control laws, and that America is insane because of its lack of strict gun control. How are these statements not at all supposed to engender both a feeling of non-American superiority and a disregard for anti-Black racism when you wholly declare that another country is "insane" within the specific instance of a minority whose oppression is part of the material backbone for the country's functioning defending themselves in such a clear-cut manner that those same racist institutions can't even bring a case against her?

You then try to soften the implication by bringing up a case of where a white man was acquitted in your country for shooting and killing an Indigenous person which was the intended function of these laws, which again reads as trite. If white people are just killing Indigenous people willy nilly and getting away with it because of the laws on the books, to what extent then is anyone supposed to take seriously your initial claims that sane countries have strict gun control laws to the point where you get thrown in the penn for taking a gun to Walmart? Seems like we both have a white supremacy problem, something you didn't and still don't want to touch upon, potentially because it undermines your initial posts about what sane countries do and don't do.

Ultimately these are very observable contradictions here that could have been avoided had you (and others) not come in so hot to reframe this thread about the "insanity" and "barbarity" of American life compared to your own, despite the fact that- wait a minute- you all are still killing Indigenous people, instead of understanding the parts and whole of this specific instance in a more empathetic and dialectical manner.

But let's continue. You now want to accuse me of shadowboxing in response to a post where I very directly answer your questions and disagree with your direct claims:

You: Has any country solved racism?
Me: No.

You: I don't live in a white ass country, unless you're even counting the US as that?
Me: Yes, the US is a white-ass country, and yours is as well considering you just gave a documented case of a white man getting away scot free with killing an Indigenous person.

You: The real reactionary stance is thinking it's good that a person being killed over a parking space is a good thing.
Me: Your framing of this entire situation is false and thus reactionary by default because this person wasn't killed over a parking space; he was killed for constantly threatening a minority.

I have been addressing you this whole time.

Regardless, on the subject of the laws. I don't think anyone disagrees that the laws are meant to serve a racist outcome. But this is a further banal observation considering some level of gun control measures are actually a popular issue with the masses but it contradicts the interests of the political class and the gun and MIC industries. A more interesting conversation can be had when people actually start thinking in a dialectical manner as to the material and historical reasons for why these incidents occur, and then laying out steps to fix it instead of going "shooting people bad." Thanks for the insightful deduction. What do you propose we do about it?

It's the pretending to not "see" the racial dynamics then shift into condescension mode that gets me.

Facts. No country wants us. They love to talk their talk but if I went to their country and said Americas racism is too much and I want asylum they'd laugh in my face and send me home.

On the plus side, at least it'd be less likely you'd have to explain why calling us subhuman is offensive.

Incredible that a thread about racism and someone getting shot in the U.S. has us wondering if leaving is worth the risk 😮‍💨

This is an issue where I disagree with ERA. A lot of people here are speaking with privilege on having reliable law enforcement, a non hostile government and emergency services that won't bankrupt you if you need medical care. Being Black and the children of immigrants? I bought a pistol and rifle for the first time in my damn 30s and regularly head to the range. Almost never try to carry my pistol and am hyper vigilant about safety and storage. Just can't trust Americans to protect my life and gotta take that into my own hands unfortunately. I'm barely treated as a human being to say nothing about being treated as a citizen with equal protection under the law. Trump just gave White people open license to do what they've always done in this country with vulnerable populations. It's open season for our asses and I'd rather have this dude dead than me.

All these posters, making these random ass comments, don't seem to understand what it's like for a black person in fucking wide America. Especially in fucking Florida.

I'm seriously shocked at these responses, and everyone here that is talking about how barbaric we are are the same ones sitting here demanding that this woman think about the guy that was about to fuck her up. The post quoted above states it perfectly. There was literally two ways this was going to end. Either this woman was hurt or that guy was. And everyone here saying how barbaric we are or blah blah blah do not understand the reality that minorities in this country go through at the hands of white guys like the one in this video. Saying that this woman should've done more to consider the guy who was threatening her, EVEN AFTER SHE POINTED THE WEAPON AT HIM AND WARNED HIM, comes off as unhinged. I guess in the perfect world you all are crafting, guns wouldn't exist and she could've just said "hey man, be cool!"and that would've ended it.

Seriously, wtf are yall smoking with these takes?

In the sane, civilized countries, Black people are duty bound to assuage their oppressors even when their oppressors are threatening harm to them. There are standards to racism, don't you know.

My point isn't about self defence or not (you could argue for almost anything as a form of self-defence), my point is how a country allows any person to pop into the local shop and buy a gun, an instrument that can causally kill someone with barely a thought is just insane to me.

Your original post that Derbel quoted said:

"As a non American it's sickening how freely a random person can whip out a gun and shoot someone dead like that."

You were specifically commenting on this case, which completely discarded the context around it to characterize this woman as some crazy loon just "freely" "whipping out a gun" to "shoot someone dead."

Now when confronted with the fact that you were disingenuously removing context, now you're saying "Oh, actually I just meant it's kinda crazy anyone can walk into a local shop and buy a gun!" which not only isn't true, but it's also a completely different argument.

Again, all that you people are doing is using a thread where a Black woman legitimately felt she had to be put in a position to take a life in order to defend herself and a child from a person who, in another thread, y'all would've been calling a disposable war criminal anyway due to his army vet status, to either turn this shit into a circus by opining about "shocked you are" (stop lying; none of you are shocked when a person in the United States gets shot by another citizen) or to brag and boast about how civilized your countries are that you have stricter gun control measures. You have no legitimate concern for any of the parties involved, and some of you have willfully opined that the woman was in the fucking wrong because she didn't tend to her oppressor with enough preparedness for your liking.

I mean this with my whole chest: Fuck y'all.

So you can fuck off with your shit trying to make me out as some sort of racist who can't see a black women defended herself.

You only mentioned it in this thread with other people brought it up. You also decide to reroute the conversation away from her well-being in the very next sentence of this post:

YesI know the context but that doesn't change how like I said almost anyone could be carrying a gun and someone could lose their life in a finger snap. It could've been a white, Indian, East Asian or whoever shooter

Your color blindness is commendable!

And yes at the very least I do think tougher gun laws is better, though ideally no guns for the general populace . That should be the bare minimum but no Americans don't think so.

Once again, objectively wrong. Plenty of Americans want a gun-free world, and a majority of Americans agree with some measure of gun control.

This is a story about a black woman defending her life from a deranged racist lunatic, and some of y'all's takeaway is "man it's so barbaric that she was allowed to shoot that guy"

I appreciate your perspective but it really is shocking to a lot of people whenever you see civilians just whip a gun out like that. I take your point about people in this thread not giving enough thought the the situation and dynamics involved but, even if it is the result of privilege, I don't think anyone is lying when they say they find it utterly incomprehensible.

I also know some poor language has been used and the USA isn't the wild west with this happening every day in every neighbourhood but it can certainly give that impression with how casually it treats gun use. FWIW, which I'm guessing isn't a lot to you, my main issue is that I don't think arming civilians regardless of race or gender makes anyone safer and there's plenty of statistics to back that up. In this instance, it may have saved this woman harm but it feels like buying a lottery ticket. You're going to lose far, far more often than you win.

Lend me the credence in assuming that, whether ENL or ESL, we all here understand the English language here enough to differentiate the difference between the words "incomprehensible" and "shocked" (if you are genuinely ignorant, then this first paragraph doesn't apply to you.) It's one thing to find something "incomprehensible," as in, "I don't understand this phenomenon." Not knowing things is an inevitability of human nature. But "shocked" is a different word. It denotes surprise or being taken off guard. No one who is what I would consider a competent adult is surprised or taken off guard when an American citizen shoots another citizen because of the international notoriety of our gun culture. It is either an expression of disingenuousness, which I cannot stand when trying to converse with other adults, or it is symptomatic of a naivete and ignorance so confounding as to be properly labeled incompetent, which is weird when people are simultaneously boasting how superior their societies are in the context of discussion. I figured that superiority would apply to your education systems too.

I am also not moved by the appeal to bad impressions because it is reactionary and I do not tolerate well reactionary sentiments when they not only, again, come from what I presume are competent adults, but competent adults who insist that they live in "superior" societies. Who cares what something "seems" like? What is the actual reality of the matter? This is the real question none of the non-Americans care to explore because this thread is not interested in a serious discussion concern gun control, but in using the issue of gun control to act in a reactionary, supremacist way. Yes, the USA is far more lenient than other white Western nations with regards to gun control, but that is not actually in contention by anyone here, which is why the issue of gun control isn't being treated seriously on its own merits. The real contention that people have is how this thread about specifically a Black woman having to use a gun to defend herself has been completely routed onto the issue of gun control in a way that is not actually reasonably productive, but as a proxy for anti-American grievance.

Let's be real. Non-Americans do not care actually about American lives like that here whether or not those lives are oppressed under the bounds of the Trump administration because of the inanity and dangers of Trump's foreign policy as of late. This thread has become, at its core, another way for non-Americans to brag about their saintly societies in the midst of great uncertainty. It's just reactionary, nationalistic peacocking. And I usually would not mind because I am someone who wants all of the various mechanisms of Western supremacy dismantled, including the United States in its current form; I was anti-America's existence before Trump started saber rattling about annexing other Western nations. But I mind right now because the discussion is coming at the cost of dismissing racism as either a non-factor or something to only performatively acknowledge before we return to the peacocking and faux "shock," and the rendering of the Black woman as yet another disposable American no different than the gun nuts shooting up schools, a mere meme to be digested and reacted towards. Again, everyone who has done this can go fuck themselves.

As for your concerns of safety, I give no guff to minorities who want to arm themselves within a supremacist society bent on their oppression and genocide. So long as it is organized a la the Black Panthers, fair dues. If you want to disarm this society, then you need to address the conditions wherein people feel like it's necessary so that they voluntarily give up their guns. You have to deal with the real world, not childish, unscientific idealism. As a foreigner, pleading with minorities to disarm when they have to deal with the material reality of living in America, when you don't, is going to fall on deaf ears.

If people here were genuinely concerned, and not simply trying to treat us as a sideshow to feel better about themselves, you would have to concern yourself with the contradictions and historical precedents that have lead up to the present situation, namely: 1.) The historical economic and social injustices that leave Black, Indigenous, and immigrant communities worse off than their white peers which in turn increases crime (and said increase in crime stokes white anxieties about the fear of rabid Black and Brown people coming to kill their families or institute a race war, turning a large segment white folks at the top of the caste into basically a perpetual customer base. It's a dialectical relationship!), and 2.) The ownership of the political class by capital which ensures popular policy like gun control will never be passed because it simply makes way too much fucking money, whether we're talking about direct sales of guns to citizens, sells of arms to foreign interests, the use of guns in various marketing or the arts, etc.. You have to start at the primary material bases, not the superstructural concepts like our laws or the media.

Tackling this issue, like any other in the imperial core, is going to require education and knowledge, pre-planning, and disciplined organization over time. It's not something that can be achieved with the snap of the fingers, because if it could be done this way then it would've been done already. But it's not going to be done right now just because people scream very loudly about how "shocked" they are. Words alone don't change the world. Action changes the world.

Obviously goes without saying there are many other issues in the US that need fixing but largely those are the same issues facing every other country and I really don't have a fucking clue how we go about solving them. I am sorry if it sounds superior but the gun issue is one that was solved (at least to a certain extent) by other countries.

Some of the reasons why other Western countries were able to quickly achieve gun control are:

A.) Historically, these countries outsourced their slavery, so they weren't left with a large, permanent underclass population within their borders who by their very nature of being considered subhuman would insist on fighting to death for their freedom, in turn causing the white population to have a social desire for gun ownership.

B.) The US colonizers were pretty much cut off from Europe at large because they were fanatical weirdoes extremely insistent on setting up the new country to be a white supremacist ethnostate in order to hoard the wealth on the American continent, which in turn meant enshrining a government system that is extremely unamenable to popular decree by design compared to other Western nations' governments.

C.) The realities of where and how WWII was conducted meant that industry of many of these countries was shot; meanwhile, America's boost in wealth afterwards was specifically from the retrofitting of many factories to produce arms for the war, which we could easily do because we weren't getting bombed to hell and back. So there is an economic incentive to producing and selling weapons, as well as conducting war, that doesn't exist to the same degree as other Western nations.

Again, you have to understand and acknowledge the reality of a situation based in part on the historical precedents to see why different countries develop in different ways.

I just wanted to respond to say I have read this and your other reply and appreciate you taking the time to do so. I don't want to take the conversation any further because I don't want to detract from the issues you have raised and also because I don't think any further contribution from myself is necessary but I am genuinely sorry if anything I have posted in this thread has been condescending, inappropriate or disrespectful. It was never intended to be that way.

Thank you. I appreciate the apology and acknowledgement.

All three of those are historically wrong, especially B and C. C is incredibly incoherent, America's post-war wealth came from using car and other factories to build arms for the war that's over rather than consumer goods? What in the fuck.

Anyway: https://www.resetera.com/threads/a-company-back-in-1984-and-the-same-one-now.1625596/#post-160147936

Bummer. Tech companies used to be on the right side, not anymore. Money ruins everything.

Tech companies have never been on the right side

Bummer. Tech companies used to be on the right side, not anymore. Money ruins everything.

By "right side" you mean fascism, right?

Tech companies used to be on the right side, not anymore.

No company is ever on the right side because companies' very reason to exist is in direct opposition to the plight of workers underneath a capitalist model.

[DavidCroquet]

ChatGPTalarico

“You’re absolutely right. I’ve missed the mark in my past statements. You were right to call me out for being deliberately provocative. I get that now, and I appreciate your attention to detail.

If you’d like, I can catch you up on my present day stance on these issues, or reframe the discussion as a broad criticism of conservative policies.

Just let me know how you’d like to proceed.”

[Potato]

The fact they think it's only Republicans and the "far right" that think men shouldn't be in women's spaces is very telling.

They really have no idea how far they've pushed things with the sensible centre.

[benji]

The fact they think it's only Republicans and the "far right" that think men shouldn't be in women's spaces is very telling.

They really have no idea how far they've pushed things with the sensible centre.

That's only because Democrats don't push back and use the arguments in favor!

[Taco Bell Tower]

"You actually went on the internet and typed something factually incorrect. How embarassing."


Chud fight on the Nazi site:

 

Also the community note's "tactical nuke" status is invalidated by the second sentence being in Engrish.

I don't watch Hasan, did Hasan started using ratio as some kind of pwnage?  Funny seein Jeff using ratio again 

[Jansen]

The barrier for what is called fascism has become so low 

Are these people not aware of how much of the population that they represent. We can live without their votes.

[benji]

Where's Clicky???

Oh, making a separate thread:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/talarico-i-oppose-trans-athletes-playing-in-girls-sports-if-it-endangers-safety-or-fairness.1628977/

Sorry bull fucking shit, James. This is so unfortunate and shitty to hear coming from him. Taking the transphobic bait and rolling with it.

Really?
And on Fox News? Ugh

Every fucking time. It is remarkable how easy it is to avoid the bait and not fall into saying profoundly stupid transphobic shit and yet, 99% of dems fail the test.

They're gonna hold this line because they're cowards who refuse to take a stand on anything meaningful. Fucking sucks.

Dude always had the stink of an industry plant, synthesized by the centrists to prove they could make their own Mamdani.

Genuinely hope he takes a well deserved hit over this and is forced to backtrack.

It's how many on the left feel as well, and they'll continue to feel that way if their own leaders continue to spout it instead of lead.

So here is one of the things that always throws me off. Why is it always about transwomen? Never transmen?

I wonder too 🤔

Because, we're basically infantilized while our sisters are demonized. They think we're like little girls wearing their dad's clothing. You can see the rhetoric with ppl like JKR who are like "wow they're so confuseddddd they don;t know what they're doooooinnnngggg".

(also generally, it's ideal to use a space so trans is a modifier as in "trans men" and "trans women" just fyi)

I'm not a trans person so I'm not in any way an expert, but from what I've read, I think traditional gender dynamics play a role in this, i.e., it's seen as something egregious for someone AMAB to transition, something of a betrayal of the patriarchy. Whether that plays into how a single transphobic individual operates, I dunno, but I have found this really interesting in that so much of the language in American political discourse is always focused on trans women.

Not really surprised. Churchy types are always sus

This is beyond the coward's way out. The coward's way out is just saying "This simply isn't an issue, I'm focusing on matters that impact the day to day lives of Texans."

Being 100% for it would kill his campaign in Texas. The wiggle room he's allowing for is still enough to turn away voters.

There's no wiggle room on this, they'll keep pushing the issue regardless of how much he tries to placate them.

I guess you can only hope he's just being deliberately misleading so the dipshit Texas centrists are more likely to vote him into power. Then he can go "turns out it doesn't endanger safety or fairness" and smack down transphobic laws.

With how dire things are for trans people nationally, and especially in red states...and especially in Texas, that hope is very hard to come by.

So here is one of the things that always throws me off. Why is it always about transwomen? Never transmen?

The concept of a 'man' playing in a women's sport is one that will trigger fears of safety and fairness far more than a 'woman' in men's sports. The nature of the appeal is to people who don't understand anything about us, our bodies, or our healthcare.

He's from Texas you can tell.

Goddamnit, what the fuck are we doing

i'm so fuckin tired

The ease to which we throw marginalized groups under the bus, and for fucking what? Has it EVER helped?

What a transphobic piece of shit.

So, is this still harm direction if he willingly participates in the genocide of trans individuals?

Imagine everything being absolutely shit, the orange piece crap has started all sorts of wars, illegally enrinched himself and his buddies and these motherfuckers are somehow still talking about trans people.

I'm so fucking tired of the bullshit scapegoating!!

Fuck the people asking these questions in the first place and fuck Talarico for his stupid ass answer.

Talk about Trump and his fucking wars and don't fall for the goddamn bait, you stupid motherfucker!

Not really a surprise sadly, he's running in Texas state wide. His state legislature votes do show he's for trans issues though.

You can't be for trans issues and be against trans women in sport because, by its very nature, it's conceding to the concept that we're men. Once that's given, the rest inevitably follows as if we're men in sport then we're also men in women's bathrooms, changing rooms, and so on.

So here is one of the things that always throws me off. Why is it always about transwomen? Never transmen?

Trans women are perceived as a threat to both men and women by bigots because women fear that they're just men larping to hurt them and men fear that they'll be attracted "to a man". These men aren't afraid of being attracted to a trans man (and if they are, whew, now they aren't gay!), and women can easily ignore their existence. For cis men, complex storm of bigotry, for cis women, different storm of bigotry + intuited power dynamics not being in their favor (never mind that their intuition is wrong and there's loads of data about what happens to trans women on HRT).

I think those types still hate trans men, they just aren't perceived as "a problem".

Idiot for getting pulled into this republican made up circus

So here is one of the things that always throws me off. Why is it always about transwomen? Never transmen?

Because trans women are actually men in their mind, and obviously predatory (interesting how they don't talk about men being predatory except when it's this or immigrants) and dangerous betrayers of the obvious gloriousness of being a man. Trans men, to them, are just sad women who don't know any better and pose no threat to anyone.

And with sports of course, they also just don't give a flying fuck about women's sports *except* when it comes to this stuff which is just the classic thing of no meaningful principles being in play here at all.

It would be amazing if Dems could show as much energy fighting against transphobia as conservatives put into propping it up. It's like the ONLY time Dems wade into the debate is to play defense....except they just end up joining the other side. Fight. The. Fuck. Back. It's so god damn tiring.

Being 100% for it would kill his campaign in Texas. The wiggle room he's allowing for is still enough to turn away voters.

What about transgender texans tho

So here is one of the things that always throws me off. Why is it always about transwomen? Never transmen?

The faulty premise of this argument is that a trans person retains the physical development of their birth-sex after gender affirming care.

There is almost no sport on earth where cis women are competitive with their cis men peers. Therefore a transgender man would never be seen as a serious threat to a cisgender man.

At the end of the day, really, the trans panic comes down to bigots being afraid their sons will want to become women. These insecure losers only see really see their children as extensions of their own ego, not individuals who deserve to find their own happiness.

So here is one of the things that always throws me off. Why is it always about transwomen? Never transmen?

There are a number of places that I could take this that will all sound absolutely horrible, but they all come down to them not being able to handle the concept of transwomen intellectually.

It would be amazing if Dems could show as much energy fighting against transphobia

Or use the energy they have towards SCARY MUSLIM HASAN YOUTUBER! towards actually protecting trans and Muslim individuals.

Fuck this shit, the moderate response should be "trans athlete panic is bullshit to distract you while billionaires pick your pocket", adopting right wing framing is a losing strategy, it was proven on 2024.

The ease to which we throw marginalized groups under the bus, and for fucking what? Has it EVER helped?

It's all in a futile attempt to make themselves more 'palatable' to white conservatives who will NEVER vote for them.

I'm not American, and I'm not familiar with his voting history on trans issues, but…. Am I the only one reading this as a clever bit of political sophistry that appears to concede a point while actually giving the bigots a whole fat lot of nothing?

"if it endangers safety or fairness" is a pretty loaded clause. To the bigots, who believe trans athletes in women's sports are inherently unsafe and unfair, it seems like he's giving them what they want. But that exact phrase can then be used once in office to justify letting trans athletes compete normally, since actual medical professionals and sports scientists have concluded there's no risks to safety, and there's nothing unfair, therefore there's nothing for him to oppose.

Hopefully understanding that you can't run a NY campaign in Texas and knowing that his opponent is personally responsible for Texas Children's setting up a detransition clinic.

So they should just shut up and vote for a guy who doesnt want them to have equal rights?

What a transphobic piece of shit.

So, is this still harm direction if he willingly participates in the genocide of trans individuals?

Oh, didn't you know? If you're not willing to cosign the death of you and your community you're a bad foot soldier.

No admonishment of the political representatives responsible for the genocide in the first place, of course! Criticism means dissent, and dissent means not falling in line, and not falling in line means you're just as bad as them!

Yeah, never trust a Politician who throws a politician who does this. I remember many said Starmer's transphobia was just "playing Politics" or whatever, no. We don't progress if we're will to throw minorities, any minority under the bus for votes, that just legitimizes hate, makes it WAY harder to fix things, makes it less likely for things to improve for those minorities and emboldens bigots if you throw them bones.

Can we not do another round of devil advocating transphobia again? This thread really isn't helping my fears that American trans people are going to be called to sacrifice themselves come November and 2028 for the "greater good".

Talarico is campaigning to flip a deep red Senate seat blue. He's on Fox to push back against his own very progressive beliefs and prior statements. I don't think he's really the best advocate to fight on an issue we have unfortunately lost public opinion on. If he "fought back" here, he gives Fox News and the Paxton campaign the sound bites that they want.

Never a good time or place to fight back against transphobia.

I'm not American, and I'm not familiar with his voting history on trans issues, but…. Am I the only one reading this as a clever bit of political sophistry that appears to concede a point while actually giving the bigots a whole fat lot of nothing?

Problem is "political sophistry" is the type of thing only folks on the left pat themselves on the back about and then turn around shocked and surprised when conservative bullshit arguments continue to have big pull.

Nobody cares about political sophistry, not in this climate.

Perhaps this answer won't sink him, and we can all sit back and comfort ourselves with "why" he's responding this way. But the core of the problem still remains for him (and a whole lot of Democrats): it's a weak response. A Republicans smell that weakness. Voters smell that weakness.

If Democrats weren't constantly throwing trans men and women under the bus, maybe I could give a little wiggle room. But there's always a seat to win, and always a reason why NOW isn't the time or place to protect them and speak out in support of them. Like...when is the right time?

You can't be for trans issues and be against trans women in sport because, by its very nature, it's conceding to the concept that we're men. Once that's given, the rest inevitably follows as if we're men in sport then we're also men in women's bathrooms, changing rooms, and so on.

Right. Trans women are women. Not women*

*in some but not all cases.

Seems like "real politics" but sadly is just giving into a system of hate. I feel bad for the millions of Texans who aren't horrible people.

Thing is, as far as transphobes are concerned, you're the pro "men in women's sports" party or whatever other BS rhetoric they throw around irregardless of what you say or do. Making concessions doesn't win you votes but it does allow for discussions to shift further right and erode marginalized groups safety. I want to hope that this is just sophistry at work here but I can't trust Democrats to really have much in the way of principles

With how dire things are for trans people nationally, and especially in red states...and especially in Texas, that hope is very hard to come by.

I know. Far too many idiots who think listening to dipshit podcasters makes them biology experts, as well as just outright bigots looking for any excuse.

I don't think they're even aware that he also said there's only two sexes.

[Let's Cyber]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/project-dream-cancelled-rare-game-that-eventually-became-banjo-kazooie-prototype-leaked-online.1628824/#post-160289944

I've held on to this for years, it was fun to have something that only a handful of people had

I genuinely hate software hoarders so much. Shiny rock-hoarding antisocial ape brain. They have the gall to make it about some performative gamer 'anti-capitalism' on top of it because they got bored rather than caring about preservation from the start.

[Jansen]

From Constructive 



They're so pathetic

[HaughtyFrank]

Not really a surprise sadly, he's running in Texas state wide. His state legislature votes do show he's for trans issues though.

You can't be for trans issues and be against trans women in sport because, by its very nature, it's conceding to the concept that we're men. Once that's given, the rest inevitably follows as if we're men in sport then we're also men in women's bathrooms, changing rooms, and so on.

Nice of Kyuuji to admit that this 100% ideological and not about fairness or biology

[DavidCroquet]

we used to say transwomen, which is not men, but also not “normal” women, but they threw a shitfit about that one too.

[simiansmarts]

From Constructive 



They're so pathetic

To the general audience, the OOT remake's art direction is no different from every other big budget high-fidelity fantasy game from the last 10+ years (Witcher, Monster Hunter, Elden Ring, etc). Only on these dedicated forums of deranged gamers are people screaming "AI SLOP! DLSS5! UE5! Nintendo hired this man!".  
 
These people need to go outside and touch grass.

[benji]

I love that they have to always write all these convoluted psychosexual explanations to "explain" why people don't believe men can be women and vice versa that basically express that "everyone" obviously knows this is clearly true on an instinctual level, that sex and gender are just a personal individual state of mind, but some people just have anxiety or whatever and deny this blatant cosmic truth for various personal reasons. They talk about others being unable to intellectually comprehend the concept of a "trans women" but they literally cannot intellectually comprehend someone fundamentally disagreeing with them about the nature of material reality and human biology.

Something that could be avoided if everyone understand the stupidity of metaphysics and learned dialectical materialism instead.

[Ethan]

For how long will they scream into the void about this? The ship has sailed on sports. Barred by most sports federations. Gender testing. 80%+ public support. Progressive politicians no longer in favour. It's done. You lost.

Stop with the performative outrage routine whenever a politician in a red/purple state states the obvious.

[Chumbawumbafan69]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/anyone-following-the-lindsay-clancy-trial-cw-child-murder.1599238/page-9#post-160201702

My wife would not stop going on about how suspicious Patrick Clancy is

I'm so sorry about that, I really wouldn't know how to react if someone close to me fell deep into conspiracy theories.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/anyone-following-the-lindsay-clancy-trial-cw-child-murder.1599238/page-9#post-160226143

I do. I would tell them to get the fuck out of my life. Stop watching TicTok bullshit and actually read up on the facts of the crime.

Kinda sus that this guy doesn't get a divorce from his wife.

[Averon]

For how long will they scream into the void about this? The ship has sailed on sports. Barred by most sports federations. Gender testing. 80%+ public support. Progressive politicians no longer in favour. It's done. You lost.

Stop with the performative outrage routine whenever a politician in a red/purple state states the obvious.

The sports issue will never be a winning argument for them. People seeing a 6'3" 300 pound transwoman manhandle female athletes half that size and weight will never not be looked on as being weird and grossly unfair.

[HaughtyFrank]

I can't believe that on this day of all days when trans women in sports are being abandoned Sydney Sweeney decides to pose naked for a sports company

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

[Potato]

For how long will they scream into the void about this? The ship has sailed on sports. Barred by most sports federations. Gender testing. 80%+ public support. Progressive politicians no longer in favour. It's done. You lost.

Stop with the performative outrage routine whenever a politician in a red/purple state states the obvious.

The sports issues will never be winning argument for them. People seeing a 6'3" 300 pound transwoman manhandle female athletes half that size and weight will never not be looked on as being weird and grossly unfair.

It's not even just the big gorillas that make it unfair. The ladies soccer team I coach played against a transformer who was about 5'6" and the physical advantages were very apparent, but most prevalent in kicking the ball. Most women struggle with kicking technique, being biomechanically less suited to the movement. Male lower body musculature=much more natural biomechanics for kicking.

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

The only war that matters is class war.

Gender, ethnicity, and everything else is bullshit created by capitalists to fracture the workers sense of class solidarity.

Thank you Talarico.

[Cauliflower Of Love]

Why am I not surprised that zeovgm is a Samsung head that’s pulling a marvel da best in the duo thread. 

[Greatness Gone]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/we-have-made-the-difficult-decision-to-step-away-from-collaborating-with-kojima-productions-on-its-project-physint-sony-xbox-picks-up-the-game.1629049/

MGS SUCCESSOR DAY 1 ON PC

REE SOYNY PONIES ON SUICIDE WATCH 

[EaldNarche]

era is gonna have a really, really rough time going into 2028 when they're forced to grapple with the fact that barely anyone outside of their bubble and bluesky thinks like they do on the trans sports and surgeries for minors things. But it always kills me how whenever people talk about surgeries for minors they say that doesn't happen... well then why are you against banning these things that don't happen? 

[simiansmarts]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/we-have-made-the-difficult-decision-to-step-away-from-collaborating-with-kojima-productions-on-its-project-physint-sony-xbox-picks-up-the-game.1629049/

MGS SUCCESSOR DAY 1 ON PC

REE SOYNY PONIES ON SUICIDE WATCH 

Death Stranding 2 must've flopped really hard for Sony to tell Kojima to fuck off. 

[Ethan]

They can refuse to vote for him, but will they? Even most Democrats believe that Transwomen shouldn't be in women's sports. In an extremely red state like Texas, its almost certainly more harmful to his campaign to be pro-trans rights in this situation.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/08/11/most-americans-are-uncomfortable-with-transgender-athletes-on-sports-teams-that-dont-match-their-birth-sex/

And this data is exactly why I get so livid about Dems not out combatting misinformation every chance they get. What this data tells me more than anything is that there are a lot of people out there who don't understand the science. Who believe there are a bunch of kids out there getting bottom surgery. Making rushed, irreversible changes.

All we need is a little re-education for those 80%.

He needs Texas votes. No way he publicly supports trans.

Trans people*. We're people, not a thing or a theory.

They can refuse to vote for him, but will they? Even most Democrats believe that Transwomen shouldn't be in women's sports. In an extremely red state like Texas, its almost certainly more harmful to his campaign to be pro-trans rights in this situation.

Trans women*. In the same way you wouldn't say blondewomen or tallwomen.

What a cunt (woman) 

[HaughtyFrank]

I'd just love to know what they think would change the mind of people about trans women in sports. Like sorry but that one study Kyuuji likes to post doesn't cut it. Meanwhile every time some trans athlete dominated or is like two heads taller than all the cis women the counterargument makes itself right there. They want to argue against every natural instinct people have. You need a damn good argument for that

[Chumbawumbafan69]

They can refuse to vote for him, but will they? Even most Democrats believe that Transwomen shouldn't be in women's sports. In an extremely red state like Texas, its almost certainly more harmful to his campaign to be pro-trans rights in this situation.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/08/11/most-americans-are-uncomfortable-with-transgender-athletes-on-sports-teams-that-dont-match-their-birth-sex/

And this data is exactly why I get so livid about Dems not out combatting misinformation every chance they get. What this data tells me more than anything is that there are a lot of people out there who don't understand the science. Who believe there are a bunch of kids out there getting bottom surgery. Making rushed, irreversible changes.

All we need is a little re-education for those 80%.

He needs Texas votes. No way he publicly supports trans.

Trans people*. We're people, not a thing or a theory.

They can refuse to vote for him, but will they? Even most Democrats believe that Transwomen shouldn't be in women's sports. In an extremely red state like Texas, its almost certainly more harmful to his campaign to be pro-trans rights in this situation.

Trans women*. In the same way you wouldn't say blondewomen or tallwomen.

What a cunt (woman) 

Is being insufferable like this a core part of being trans? Even when people agree with them they still have to act like cunts.

[EaldNarche]

Is being insufferable like this a core part of being trans? Even when people agree with them they still have to act like cunts.

only if you're mtf. the estrogen makes you a huge bitch and takes away your ability to open pickle jars unassisted.

[jimmys13]

I think a thing that makes me sad is that there are so many visible trans people in media right now -- more than at any other time in at least MY life.

Yet when it comes to politics, we still don't want to center trans people in conversations ABOUT trans people.

Go on TS Madison's podcast.

Have a conversation with Hope Giselle.

I don't think Kat Blaque does interviews but reach out anyway.

Dominique Morgan will do an Instagram live with you!

Plenty of trans people -- VISIBLE trans people -- in the social/activist space who could be centered in this conversation on your position on trans issues that would likely not be framed as gotchas, but actual conversations. Hell, have these conversations privately. Steel your resolve.

But no...keep going on Fox News and having this conversation with people who don't know shit about shit.

Why go on the USA's largest news network when you could go on Areola Shaboey's Bluesky podcast.

[Greatness Gone]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/we-have-made-the-difficult-decision-to-step-away-from-collaborating-with-kojima-productions-on-its-project-physint-sony-xbox-picks-up-the-game.1629049/

MGS SUCCESSOR DAY 1 ON PC

REE SOYNY PONIES ON SUICIDE WATCH 

Death Stranding 2 must've flopped really hard for Sony to tell Kojima to fuck off. 

It seemingly did even worse than 1. Which is a shame since Kojima intentionally dumbed down 2 to appeal to a wider audience. I really wish devs would stop trying to appeal to normies, it always makes games worse. Still a great game though.

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/talarico-i-oppose-trans-athletes-playing-in-girls-sports-if-it-endangers-safety-or-fairness-update-doubles-down-on-transphobic-talking-points.1628977/page-5#post-160303537

Some of the statistics here are shocking. A full 35%, 1 in 3, of LGBTQ folks believe trans athletes shouldn't compete as their chosen gender.

And 73% of people who recognize that being transgender is a genuine way to live life still don't believe they should compete.