Войти в систему

Home
    - Создать дневник
    - Написать в дневник
       - Подробный режим

LJ.Rossia.org
    - Новости сайта
    - Общие настройки
    - Sitemap
    - Оплата
    - ljr-fif

Редактировать...
    - Настройки
    - Список друзей
    - Дневник
    - Картинки
    - Пароль
    - Вид дневника

Сообщества

Настроить S2

Помощь
    - Забыли пароль?
    - FAQ
    - Тех. поддержка



Пишет nancygold ([info]nancygold)
@ 2024-08-19 21:00:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Настроение: amused
Музыка:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqREZRh7nso
Entry tags:transitioning

Why I am not "evil"

People keep calling me "evil."

But what does it mean to be "evil?" What makes one "evil?"

There were many definitions of evil across time and cultures.

Generally it boils down to "evil is something bad for our group."

Both Russians and Ukrainians call each other evil.

And civilized people call both of these aboriginal tribes evil.

In the overpopulated world the death of a billion could be good.

In fact, Bible promotes drowning all sinners.

In Bible it is definitely not an evil to do a genocide.

So we may conclude, that the notion of "evil" is not universal.

Evil is always relative to some agent or a group of agents.

Are mosquitoes evil? If you're a mammal, then yes.

But for a dragonfly it is a food source.

So speaking about some evil in abstract vacuum makes no sense.

Yet authors like Joanne Rofling have insect brain.

The relativism is too complex for them.

They generalize their notions of good and evil.

But such hasty generalizations fail.

So the stupid beings get confused.

I'm not evil, because there is no evil.

I'm not good, because there is no good.

I'm just what I am.

Everything else is a social construct.

I watch the movies to enjoy seeing the characters facing complex problems.

I don't care if the characters are "good" or "evil" in any of the notions.

I only care that the problems are complex and interesting enough.

Hope that explains it.


(Читать комментарии) - (Добавить комментарий)


(Анонимно)
2024-08-20 15:58 (ссылка)
So their standards stand in the way of your financial parasitism. These pieces of shit removed the financial tranny burden from the normies!

But seriously what you say is literally isn't the case, and only a greater push toward forcing insurers to pay for medical transitioning can be observed. They call it "gender-affirming care" and in the US, the literal homeland of the LGBT and woke ideology. In the liberal states there are literally mandates for it. If the situation is different in the Netherlands then it has more to do with the Netherlands, rather than with the American led lgbt movement. Also you don't know Dutch, so you can't even knowingly tell what's the actual situation in the country. There is also the Sadkov factor, how you magically able to antagonize people around you so they aren't willing to help you.

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/14/1046140320/colorado-now-requires-gender-affirming-care-to-be-covered-by-private-health-insu

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/state-healthcare-plans-must-cover-transgender-related-care-federal-court-rules

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


[info]nancygold
2024-08-20 16:13 (ссылка)
No idea about America. But I got denied HRT in Netherlands, because the female hormones are "not mandatory to be a women," and local LGBT faggots told me multiple times that dicks can be "feminine"

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


(Анонимно)
2024-08-20 16:32 (ссылка)
>I got denied HRT in Netherlands

It requires more investigation before assigning the entirety or even part of the blame to the transgender movement, which is international. You don't know Dutch, so you don't even know what the laws are, the precedents etc etc. Such rejection could simply be illegal, a result of collusion between insurers and doctors, could be discrimination of immigrants(who came to drain resources here on their surgeries, let's be real), could be discrimination of you personally, which is highly likely, considering how abrasive you are.

There is a moral hazard -- if you pay for surgeries for LGBT asylum immigrants, do it more than someone else, than there will be financially burdensome influx of such immigrants. It isn't a simple issue.

>local LGBT faggots told me multiple times that dicks can be "feminine"

This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with denial of care for those who want this care. I see no contradiction with "dicks can be feminine" and "some want vaginas anyway".

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)


(Читать комментарии) -