17 ms·

That is polarising. An extreme take. I haven't seen anybody make the argument that trans people should be killed. Just that men should not be able to use women

by 93s6oz 7y ago

That is polarising. An extreme take. I haven't seen anybody make the argument that trans people should be killed. Just that men should not be able to use women bathrooms. In this case, that's the argument. Turning it into something like that is not going to help anybody.

matt4077 7y ago
It’s polarizing only if you accept the you-should-die part one of the poles, which is sort of the problem I was getting at. I would characterize it more as reductio ad absurdum.
pjc50 7y ago
> I haven't seen anybody make the argument that trans people should be killed Brunei?
- sadris 7y ago
  Think their law applies to homosexuals, not transexuals.
  - mike00632 7y ago
    If I were trans I don't think I would take my chances of them making a meaningful distinction.
TimothyBJacobs 7y ago
The OP didn't say the counter argument was that trans people should be killed, but that they shouldn't exist. You are taking the take to the extreme. Routinely, trans people are treated as an entity that should not exist. Or a disease or condition that should be rooted out. Not a valid identity.