• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

The View: Hillary Clinton compares decision to not divorce Bill to parenting a transgender child

Status
Not open for further replies.

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
15,450
It doesn't make a parent a bigot, for being absolutely terrified of the future their child will have, though you'll not find me once stating that parent who chooses not to support/accept their child being trans as in any way, shape or form, justified, because it is quite clearly, wrong and abhorrent to abandon your child like that. It is -brave- to not be a coward and do the right thing though, which is the entire point of my posts, and to be honest, this has very little to do with Hilary anymore, and more on the note that people discount how hard it can be for parents to go through a situation like that.

Oh, and I should clarify, I'm aware that some parents are just hateful bigots who don't struggle with the decision to abandon their child either.
I'm not going to continue to engage someone who is suggesting that Hilary is comparing her decision to not leave her sexual predator husband to a decision about a tran child because they are worried about what trauma awaits them in the real world. This is some galaxy brain shit thats being generous to her beyond reason, and even if we grant you that this is what she was saying, it still doesn't not make it one of the most absurd comparisons Ive heard in a long time.
 
Last edited:

Boiled Goose

Member
Nov 2, 2017
9,331
It's a good thing everyone in this thread is totally coming from a place from compassion, and there isn't any people who are using actual issues regarding trans people as a spring board to shit post about some politician they don't like.

Cause I mean, that would be pretty fucking heinous and morally bankrupt if people were doing that, but nobody would be that low of a person to actually do such a thing.
This is a pretty bad post.

Do you say the same thing in every thread regarding Trump racism???

How do we distinguish criticism worthy actions and springboards ? Politicians you personally like vs not???
 

Boiled Goose

Member
Nov 2, 2017
9,331
It doesn't make a parent a bigot, for being absolutely terrified of the future their child will have, though you'll not find me once stating that parent who chooses not to support/accept their child being trans as in any way, shape or form, justified, because it is quite clearly, wrong and abhorrent to abandon your child like that. It is -brave- to not be a coward and do the right thing though, which is the entire point of my posts, and to be honest, this has very little to do with Hilary anymore, and more on the note that people discount how hard it can be for parents to go through a situation like that.

Oh, and I should clarify, I'm aware that some parents are just hateful bigots who don't struggle with the decision to abandon their child either.
It was a bad analogy. You don't have to defend it. :/
 

Midnight Jon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,849
Ohio
so is that person who thought "neoliberalism" meant "pandering to the base" ever going to answer for their crimes? seeing that post was almost as bad as seeing someone get vitriolic with every poster in a thread about a clumsily delivered anecdote (involving a group i identify with) that the last democratic nominee felt compelled to share

if you can't tell this is snark you should probably take a break
 
Last edited:

Oddish1

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,292
This seems fairly benign to me? The comparison as she says is just facing a decision where you're not sure what the right thing to do is because it's something they've never had to experience before. It certainly didn't come across as her saying accepting or not accepting a trans child are both valid options.
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,003
This is a pretty bad post.

Do you say the same thing in every thread regarding Trump racism???

How do we distinguish criticism worthy actions and springboards ? Politicians you personally like vs not???
When OP spends his time digging up random clips and flipping his shit at everyone who might have an issue with his framing and the fact he cited The Washington Examiner and is trying to act like some hero and super ally while ignoring those who are actually part of the topic at hand because it's inconvenient to him.

It's pretty obvious who is genuine in criticism and who isn't.
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,975
It blows my mind how many die hard Hillary supporters are still around considering she’s pretty blatantly an enabler of Bill Clinton. Everything she says comes off as being hollow and fake.
 

Siggy-P

Avenger
Mar 18, 2018
6,176
I stopped replying because I blocked them because they are engaging in bad faith. Also, do you think trans people are not capable of engaging with or defending transphobia? Similarly, do you believe that, for instance, a gay jewish person is incapable of supporting a neo nazi movement? Because Caitlyn Jenner and Milo Yiannopolis would like a word with you.

Your defenses of this shit are not as clever as you think.
No, see unlike you I actually give a shit about what different posters have to say, and don't just immediatly default to "well if they disagree with ME then they must be transphobic because I'm such an amazing ally."

And you can tell me how people who are trans can be transphobic all you like, you still spent this whole thread operating on the basis that anyone who disagrees with your take is a cis-gendered centrist transphobe. And when Thelostbigboss calls you out you just conveniently happened to have blocked them before that post...
 

Menchi

Member
Oct 28, 2017
513
I think the situation can be described as difficult, sure, because there's a lot going on, especially for a parent who might not be familiar with trans issues. However, the decision to support them is a no brainer. To not do so is to literally become another challenge they face. It may technically be a decision, but not one that merits any sort of serious consideration or any sort of use in a context about choices that are actually hard.
Oh I agree completely that it isn't much of a decision, as choosing not to support them, is abhorrent, and just flat out wrong. I just think it is brave to support your child in the face of the adversity, as opposed to being a coward and not.

I'm not going to continue to engage someone who is suggesting that Hilary is comparing her decision to not leave her sexual predator husband to a decision about a tran child because they are worried about what trauma awaits them in the real world.
You're being extremely disingenuous considering you have read all of my posts, and KNOW that's not what I'm doing. So okay, on ignore list you go.

It was a bad analogy. You don't have to defend it. :/
Yes, I said as much in my first post, which you may not have seen. Not disputing that at all.
 

Boiled Goose

Member
Nov 2, 2017
9,331
When OP spends his time digging up random clips and flipping his shit at everyone who might have an issue with his framing and the fact he cited The Washington Examiner and is trying to act like some hero and super ally while ignoring those who are actually part of the topic at hand because it's inconvenient to him.
Regardless of the OPs intentions or framing it was a bad hamfisted analogy by HRC. No need to defend it. Just say that. Move on. HRC is far from perfect (understatement) and most people her age aren't going to be completely woke. The kneejerk defense is far worse than whatever the OP is doing according to you.
 

Boiled Goose

Member
Nov 2, 2017
9,331
This seems fairly benign to me? The comparison as she says is just facing a decision where you're not sure what the right thing to do is because it's something they've never had to experience before. It certainly didn't come across as her saying accepting or not accepting a trans child are both valid options.
What are the two options in each scenario?

That will show you why it's a horrible analogy. It's not a huge deal, but there's no need to defend it.
 
Oct 28, 2017
955

WHAT AN ALLY. What a tremendous ally from the 80s and 90s when she confidently and without hesitation shoots down the idea of gay rights.



Yes, and I re-hosted the clip they cited (that article, btw, is literally just them quoting directly from the video) from the view. Know why I posted the examiner link in the first thread? Because that's the only link that I saw after finding a trans friend fuming about this. So go fuck yourself with your lukwarm defense of transphobia.

But yeah, let's pearl clutch over sources despite the source being a video from The View in which she says everything quoted word for word on video.

Nice try though.
You know. This is only partially related, but there was a minor internet controversy a few days ago over members of the Queer Eye team's support for Hillary and opposition to Bernie. There's a relatively detailed post on r/OoTL which goes into why Hillary actually has a significant amount of support among older members of the LGBT community:


It might also be worth comparing Hillary and Obama's record on the issue of gay marriage:



Constant threads? First one I've seen in weeks.

The comparison is a bit hamfisted and deserves some push back. Not s big deal.
Probably referring to this:

 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2017
10,003
Regardless of the OPs intentions or framing it was a bad hamfisted analogy by HRC. No need to defend it. Just say that. Move on. HRC is far from perfect (understatement) and most people her age aren't going to be completely woke. The kneejerk defense is far worse than whatever the OP is doing according to you.
Yea, that's a hard fucking disagree considering OP was clearly using the topic of trans issues as diving board to do what he did.

I already wrote why the analogy isn't even a direct analogy to what OP posted in the title (the title which was lifted 1:1 from the Washington Examiner), so you can go see that if that's what you're referring to as a "knee-jerk defense" is.

This thread is a good microcosm of people who use social issues as their personal ego trip to feel righteous, even as people who are in the group they think they are being some fucking hero in is telling them to slow their roll.
 

The Boat

Member
Oct 28, 2017
873
I wonder how many people actually watched the video. Because she's not really comparing them, she's giving examples of women being gutsy (her upcoming book is Gutsy Women) after saying why staying with Bill was her gutsiest moment.
 

Oddish1

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,292
What are the two options in each scenario?

That will show you why it's a horrible analogy. It's not a huge deal, but there's no need to defend it.
Well that wasn't really the point of her comparison, but if you insist. The two options in that scenario would be for her to leave her husband or stay with him and the other would be to deny the child's identity or accept it. She then frames it as accepting the child was the correct thing to do and that staying with her husband was the correct thing for "her" to do. At no point does she imply that not accepting a trans child was a valid choice only that it was a situation where the mother was not sure what the right thing to do was.

That's why it's a benign analogy. It's not a huge deal, but there's no need for you to go out of your way to attack it.
 

Disclaimer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,657
Regardless of the OPs intentions or framing it was a bad hamfisted analogy by HRC. No need to defend it. Just say that. Move on. HRC is far from perfect (understatement) and most people her age aren't going to be completely woke. The kneejerk defense is far worse than whatever the OP is doing according to you.
It wasn't even an analogy in the 1:1 sense that the OP framed it (hamfistedly), though. She was speaking generally about tough situations/crossroads people face, and in the relevant anecdote, her friend came to the decision "with love and understanding ... to respect the feelings of my child, as hard as it is for [her] to understand this." And as abhorrent as it is to think, yeah, that is a choice for a parent -- as many of us have experienced during a coming out process.

She clearly did not intend any sort of moral comparison between an adulterous husband and a coming out child, which is the crux of this whole thread, and why she wasn't (in my estimation) being transphobic. I mean, she painstakingly outlined her own stance within the anecdote, implied to have been reflected in the advice she gave her friend.

So there's nothing "kneejerk" about people's "defense" (read: interpretation), and said defense is certainly incomparable to the consistently vitriolic and disingenuous OP.
 

collige

Member
Oct 31, 2017
5,444
I wonder how many people actually watched the video. Because she's not really comparing them, she's giving examples of women being gutsy (her upcoming book is Gutsy Women) after saying why staying with Bill was her gutsiest moment.
You don't see a problem with framing basic dignity towards your own child as gutsy?
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,975
Many people are overlooking that she says staying with Bill, a known sexual predator, was a “gutsy” decision.

How she still gets away with enabling Bill blows my mind. We still have people acting like it’s ok, much less brave and courageous of her to do that. Bullshit.
 

The Boat

Member
Oct 28, 2017
873
You don't see a problem with framing basic dignity towards your own child as gutsy?
This has been addressed before by other posters. You are delusional if you think it doesn't take a lot to accept your child as trans and help them, especially with older generations who aren't nearly as informed about this as younger people. Not to mention that a few years make a world of difference when it comes to being "woke" about LGBTQ+ rights and what they go through.

We don't live in a perfect world, change is hard. Dealing with things you aren't used to and are so different from what you always thought and were taught was "normal" or "right" takes a lot of courage, even if it's just to provide something that should be basic.

Shaming people who are open to be better and actually end up doing the right thing, just because they aren't absolutely perfect and pure isn't just unfair and wrong, it's counter productive in helping inform people and spread tolerance.

Edit: Of course, parents should support and help their children. Denying that to a trans child is absolutely monstrous.
 
Last edited:

Agar25

Member
Apr 12, 2018
5,019
Many people are overlooking that she says staying with Bill, a known sexual predator, was a “gutsy” decision.

How she still gets away with enabling Bill blows my mind. We still have people acting like it’s ok, much less brave and courageous of her to do that. Bullshit.
Yup, even setting this interview aside the bolded has always baffled me. It’s inexcusable, well it should be but for many it’s seen as ok because “ she was playing a long game” or some other nonsense for the Presidency. The most toxic part of 2016 for me was how infallible you had to believe Hillary was or else you were sexist/ Bernie bro/ closet Trumper and on and on. So many of the loudest people couldn’t just couldn’t take any issues about her character being raised , some still can’t as evidenced by this very thread.

* And I’m sorry if I and others are not falling over ourselves to award points for anyone exhibiting basic human decency by treating LGBT with full empathy and respect. I’m sorry I don’t think “ well they were raised a certain way” is enough of an excuse to negate a basic “ live and let live ” POV.
The privilege you must have to come with “Well let’s be patient and loving with these ignorant folks y’all they don’t know any better.” Fucking miss me aaaaaall the way with that
 
Last edited:

jumper

Member
Oct 27, 2017
50
This thread is a good microcosm of people who use social issues as their personal ego trip to feel righteous, even as people who are in the group they think they are being some fucking hero in is telling them to slow their roll.
I think you nailed the source of drama in this thread, pretty succinctly. And I see this a lot elsewhere (mostly on the internet). There's this tendency to assume and attack someone who doesn't agree or isn't offended as somehow on the other side of the issue. Instead of saying 'Ok, but I see it differently', and making arguments to make people see the other side of things, they attack, bark orders and say 'if you don't see it this way then that means you are a [label]'. Sort of like how the OP basically accused me of being a transphobe.

Anyways, this sort of infighting only further hurts any cause. We shouldn't be barking orders at people when they express their take.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
6,114
As a trans woman I think it's shameful how much attention this thread has garnered so quickly vs how little any of you seem to care when the trump admin tries new ways to legislate trans lives out of existance on a monthly basis. Y'all are just interested in five minute hate against an irrelevant person.
 

Zed

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,968
The Hillary Clinton defense force sure is something.

Her response is at the very least tone deaf.
 

BAW

Member
Oct 27, 2017
618
Well, couldn't be more blatant than that. Trans people for her is an issue and a problem that she wishes could be prayed away from this world, just like adultery. Together with the fact that she stayed with a known sexual predator for personal gain, it's a miracle there are still apologists for this piece of shit human being.
 

Boiled Goose

Member
Nov 2, 2017
9,331
Yea, that's a hard fucking disagree considering OP was clearly using the topic of trans issues as diving board to do what he did.

I already wrote why the analogy isn't even a direct analogy to what OP posted in the title (the title which was lifted 1:1 from the Washington Examiner), so you can go see that if that's what you're referring to as a "knee-jerk defense" is.

This thread is a good microcosm of people who use social issues as their personal ego trip to feel righteous, even as people who are in the group they think they are being some fucking hero in is telling them to slow their roll.
Aren't you doing the same? White knighting and speaking for others?

Personally, I'd rather discuss the merits of the claim and then move on. Defending HRC is a pretty questionable hill to die on.
 

Boiled Goose

Member
Nov 2, 2017
9,331
Well that wasn't really the point of her comparison, but if you insist. The two options in that scenario would be for her to leave her husband or stay with him and the other would be to deny the child's identity or accept it. She then frames it as accepting the child was the correct thing to do and that staying with her husband was the correct thing for "her" to do. At no point does she imply that not accepting a trans child was a valid choice only that it was a situation where the mother was not sure what the right thing to do was.

That's why it's a benign analogy. It's not a huge deal, but there's no need for you to go out of your way to attack it.
Am I going out of my way to attack it?

It's not a big deal, but it's a horrible analogy. If you didn't take pause writing those two scenarios as anywhere near equivalent then you clearly DON'T get it at all. Accepting and supporting someone as trans should never ever be fucking compared to staying in a marriage or not. Add in the fact that the marriage is to BC and then... It just gets worse.
 

Kyuuji

Member
Nov 8, 2017
8,061
  • She bungles what she's saying but I get the intent of it even if it's a tone-deaf response.
  • The comparison is the real stumper but she was meandering at that point, didn't feel explicit.
  • Supporting your trans child might be a difficult test as a parent requiring a lot of patience, reading and understanding for those unfamiliar to trans issues. I wouldn't say it's being particularly "gutsy" to do so though.
  • This is like jalapeno levels of concern, reading the OP I found the fervour in their responses a tad imbalanced.
  • More irritated by the people jumping in purely to wave away any concern with things like 'lol not gonna touch this thread with a bargepole, will be a graveyard' and 'stop whining' - common tropes for threads on trans issues here.
  • Why can't old people just stop talking about trans people if they still fumble over it. It doesn't need to be something you include in conversation for the sake of it.
 

Matador

Alt Account
Banned
Sep 12, 2019
132
User Banned (5 Days): Conspiratorial rhetoric and accusations of astroturfing; account in junior phase
I wonder if Correct the Record has / will infiltrate this place much the same as it did NeoGAF in 2015-2016.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.