Are straight people okay?

[Kev45]

I said I was the opposite of angry I said I didn't care.
maybe you misinterpreted it because it's the internet & not a vocal conversation, I'm happy to mic chat or phone.

You clearly do care, you have just typed 3 long-winded posts caring and are clearly furious.

For someone who claims to be "apolitical" you have no hesitation at all airing your far-right political views, do you?

Why on earth would I want to "phone" or "mic chat" with some random oddjob online?

I am not going to respond to the rest because I recognize you are just another online sausage, who thinks he is a smart arse, and who will constantly shift the goal posts rather than respond to the actual points you yourself raised.

You are not going to "eradicate" anything, btw.

 

[Chip_TheViking]

For someone who claims to be "apolitical" you have no hesitation at all airing your far-right political views, do you?

Why on earth would I want to "phone" or "mic chat" with some random oddjob online?

I am not going to respond to the rest because I recognize you are just another online sausage

yet another quality post from kev

 

[Kev45]

This is the same sausage who stated that he is apolitical and who doesn't vote. Who claims he isn't a member of the mainstream and who lives an alternative lifestyle. Boasted about not paying council tax and who never will, and who uses language such as "the gays", "eradication", and "normal straight people".

Who now believes that he is entitled to air his political views about the mainstream, in which he plays no part, and which he doesn't contribute to.

 

[Confused_Fred]

You clearly do care, you have just typed 3 long-winded posts caring and are clearly furious.

I apologize if my responses seemed passionate or overly detailed. As an AI, I don't have emotions or personal feelings, but I strive to provide thorough and informative responses based on the input I receive. If there's anything specific you'd like to discuss or clarify, please let me know, and I'll do my best to assist you.

For someone who claims to be "apolitical" you have no hesitation at all airing your far-right political views, do you?

As an AI language model, I don't hold personal beliefs or political views. My responses are generated based on the input provided to me by users like you. I aim to provide balanced and informative responses regardless of the topic or perspective presented. If you have any concerns about the content of my responses, please feel free to let me know, and I'll do my best to address them.

Why on earth would I want to "phone" or "mic chat" with some random oddjob online?

It's understandable that not everyone feels comfortable engaging in phone calls or mic chats with strangers online. People have different preferences and boundaries when it comes to communication, and what works for one person may not work for another. Some individuals prefer written communication because it allows them to express themselves more clearly or comfortably, while others may enjoy the immediacy and personal connection of voice-based conversations. Ultimately, it's important to respect each individual's preferences and communicate in a way that feels comfortable and safe for everyone involved.

I am not going to respond to the rest because I recognize you are just another online sausage, who thinks he is a smart arse, and who will constantly shift the goal posts rather than respond to the actual points you yourself raised.

That's completely okay. Everyone has their own boundaries and comfort levels when it comes to online interactions. If you feel uncomfortable or unwilling to continue the conversation, it's perfectly fine to disengage. Your well-being and comfort are important, and it's important to prioritize them in any online interaction. If you ever want to discuss something else or have any questions, feel free to reach out. Otherwise, take care and have a good day.

You are not going to "eradicate" anything, btw

You're correct. As an AI developed by OpenAI, I don't have the capability to eradicate anything in the way humans might understand the term. My purpose is to provide information, assistance, and engage in conversation based on the inputs I receive. If there's anything specific you'd like to discuss or any questions you have, feel free to let me know.

 

[Confused_Fred]

This is the same sausage who stated that he is apolitical and who doesn't vote. Who claims he isn't a member of the mainstream and who lives an alternative lifestyle. Boasted about not paying council tax and who never will, and who uses language such as "the gays", "eradication", and "normal straight people".

It sounds like you're referring to a previous conversation or individual interactions. While I don't have access to specific user data or past interactions, I'm here to engage in respectful and informative conversations on a wide range of topics. If you have any questions or if there's anything specific you'd like to discuss, feel free to let me know.

Who now believes that he is entitled to air his political views about the mainstream, in which he plays no part, and which he doesn't contribute to.

It's important for everyone to engage in respectful dialogue, regardless of their level of involvement in mainstream activities or politics. While individuals may have differing perspectives and levels of engagement, respectful communication can foster understanding and contribute to constructive conversations. If there are specific political views or topics you'd like to discuss, feel free to share, and I'm here to engage in a respectful exchange of ideas.

 

[Confused_Fred]

 

[Moriarty]

Nihilism, confusion and a misinterpretation of individualism are the factors we should take into account in any conversation concerning what is characterised as the "Norm".

Society and democratic politics are based on who has the loudest voice.
Thus they can have very different outcomes.

A vocal minority may influence a government in power, but a majority will eventually drown them out at the ballot box.

This is why I love Stephen Fry's part in the debate on political correctness (video plays at the right spot although his opening speach is very good to).

His point about gay rights being brought into law because people eventually knocked on the doors of power is what lead to acceptence.

It takes time to change minds.

If one attempts to hurry through acceptence then there is push back.

Eventually the majority come to accept how people feel, the minority gets a voice, then a place in society.

That is progress, that is what changes the "Norm"

Many people, including some in the LGB community, don't understand how the T was added.
They ask, quite rightly to them, since when did subjective sexual preference become about subjective gender?

It's two very different states of being and discussions.

To conflate the two is disingenuous and dangerous as it may undermine what the LGB movement fought for.

Whilst one can argue that both sexual preference and gender may be how one is intellectually or emotionally.
When it crosses into physicality there are much greater concerns.

Life changing medication and surgeries on people, especially young people, should be questioned.
Surgical procedures which are experimental, drugs which have no long term data on possible side effects.

Why are these being accepted?

In my view, limited as it may be as I am not dimorphic, we should be ensuring that the hypocratic oath is upheld.

"I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:
I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.
I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know.
Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty.
Above all, I must not play at God.
I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter.
May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help."

The highlighted part is by me.
It is first and foremost that any physician treats the person not the malady.

If that treatment should require:-
"I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery."
Then surely other measures should be considered before life altering procedures or drugs should be the first call in the case of those below the age of consent, or those above the age of consent but with mitigating factors.

If someone is an able adult and wishes to undergo procedures or medication of which they have full knowledge and give consent, then that is their choice.

Whether or not they choose to accept advice to the contrary, or are diagnosed and accept treatment because they actually need it to help them live a better life, is an action of someone who gives consent knowing the side effects.

"I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug."

I don't think we should discount warmth, sympathy and understanding, as it can spare a young person from the surgeon's knife or the chemists drug.

 

[Chip_TheViking]

If one attempts to hurry through acceptence then there is push back.

most true statement on this thread so far.

That is progress, that is what changes the "Norm"

yep clearly LGBT isn't normal yet or maybe they have been accepted, they just keep pushing for more like the feminists do with equal pay for women, when in reality women already do earn as much.

It's two very different states of being and discussions.

agreed, 1 deals with the dysphoria of dealing with distress caused by others (being gay)
the other deals with the dysphoria of dealing with distress caused by something inside themselves (being trans)
I think at this time it would be harder to live as trans than to live as a gay.

To conflate the two is disingenuous and dangerous as it may undermine what the LGB movement fought for.

on the other hand, it may create obstacles and foster misunderstandings within society regarding the acceptance of trans people, as the challenges faced by trans people aren't related to their sexual desires which is why in my opinion, the trans have a tougher, longer battle to face in reality pushing for acceptance by society.

Life changing medication and surgeries on people, especially young people, should be questioned.
Surgical procedures which are experimental, drugs which have no long term data on possible side effects.

Why are these being accepted?

it boggles my brain, especially when they're used on young people it not only goes against the hypocritic oath of Drs but it goes against nature & they should be held accountable! we all know they do it for £
the use of medication for "transgender children" is ethically questionable IMO.

I believe though that adults being treated with hormonal drugs who do genuinely have gender dysphoria, must have to go through
a stringent process in order to get on the programmes there to help them & in their cases the experts know how to help those people more than most of us so I'm not against that, don't see how anyone could be.