You all must not be paying attention or just, for whatever reason, choose not to see the nuttiness of the regressive left. Not only is there a war on biology there is a war on language and objective fact and observed reality being waged by the far left. So you are correct, there is no equivalence on the right to that magnitude of doublethink.
Moderating:
Indicating that you’re putting someone on your ‘Ignore’ list is a violation of our rules outside the Pit. Please do not do this again.
Not a warning, only guidance.
Sure (/s), give us the biological Democratic lunacy equivalent to this:
Mind you, until recent times there were similar numbers of anti vaccine people in both sides (and they were a fringe group in both parties), unfortunately the “info-sphere” that many Republicans use has found that the conspiracy minded anti-vaccine people are a significant group to pander.
Ok… the anti-vaccine lunacy is what we’d call an “outlier.”
Of course there was an observation that was in essence about humans humaning, within context of a (possibly if not probably rhetorical) question in essence involving/raising the question of why GOP (individuals and entities) suck up/pander to/take advantage of human propensity toward irrationality/an inability to be dispassionate and objective to the point where it hinders or destroys logic and reasoning … but posed in such a way as to indicate what is erroneous: that U.S. citizens in particular (never mind humans in general) only in recent years began a trend toward irrationality. Please see [1] 
.
My observation does not call for what you refer to as a demand that I produce “(an observed case of Democratic irrationality comparable to the observed cases of Republican irrationality)”.
That however many folk prefer to believe what is a universal truth about humans in general and politics in particular is unfortunate and silly.
[1]
The nice trick from the irrationals is to convince others that they are not also being controlled by the right-wing way of framing the discussion (about what are the irrational ideas to begin with).
If you are referring to the existence or non existence of transgenderism, I think that you will find that the overwhelming scientific consensus among clinicians support its existence. So for the purposes of factual differences this is just another area along with evolution and global warming where we have to decide whether the scientific method is more valid that traditional gut feeling.
As to what pronoun to use that is not a factual question but one of culture and ethics. There is no natural law that says that I should call those who identify as female “her” even if they were called male at birth, nor is the reverse true. Its just a question as to whether altering ones terminology to show respect towards, and improve the comfort level their fellow man, woman, or non-binary is worth the effort it takes to do so.
This is entirely different from such factual notions as, “Are Walmarts being renovated with tunnels to FEMA detention centers in preparation for the invasion of Texas.”
Due to my admittedly uncivil and now regretted choice of words @Fallen has refused to take me up on my offer to provide examples of nuttiness among prominent Democratic law makers. So I extend the same invitation to you of either providing such examples or withdrawing the claim.
Was this meant for some other thread? The conversation you’re jumping into the middle of is about whether the Democratic party embraces their nutters like the Republicans do.
This is a war being waged by the far right, not the far left.
That paragraph was too vague and made no point whatsoever. Re-attempt.
Your observation was supposed to have called for what was referred to "a demand that [you] produce ‘(an observed case of Democratic irrationality comparable to the observed cases of Republican irrationality)’”, hence, the multiple requests for you to do so, otherwise, your unsubstantiated claims have no worth, (if you’re hoping to convince anyone here, anyway).
Again, a nothing statement that was in no way buttressed by the two posts you linked below it.
No, no! Please do NOT re-attempt!
Heh, you could have point, there, TL.
This is frothing bothsidesist nonsense. As Buck_Godot rightly points out, acknowledging the neurobiological realities of transgender and nonbinary gender identities, and expanding the recognized usage of gendered nouns and pronouns to reflect those realities, is not in any way denying “biology” or “language” or “objective fact” or “observed reality”.
Considering how ardently mainstream Republicans are also embracing climate-change-denial lunacy, and imaginary-election-fraud lunacy, and magical-border-wall lunacy, and endless-tax-cuts-for-wealthy lunacy, and don’t-admit-the-early-US-was-racist lunacy, and imaginary-Chinese-conspiracies lunacy, and a whole bunch of other anti-factual beliefs, I think the grounds for claiming that anti-vaccine lunacy is an “outlier” in the modern Republican mindset are pretty weak.
I doubt this very much.
I mean, I bet it’s true about the “histrionic” and money-soliciting parts. But I agree that Fallen is certainly getting nothing from “mainstream left orgs” that’s anywhere near as drastically “counterfactual” as the bullshit about COVID denial and vaccine opposition and “election fraud” and so on that mainstream right orgs are spewing nonstop.
I doubt that someone who is obviously on the far right of the spectrum is getting daily solicitations from the far left. How on earth would they get his email address?
Are there any emails from leftish organizations that say that Obama is still president? That Mole-men are trying to take over from their moon base? That the flat earth is a danger to society as we know it?
Well, Fallen said it was the “mainstream left”, but again, Fallen hasn’t provided any specific examples of the alleged “counterfactuality” of these solicitations.
I think he’s used to people just agreeing with his bare assertions without asking for evidence. The concept seems alien to him.
First Law of Bothsidism
Given that many a staunch eft winger here on the Dope has mentioned finding themselves the recipient of a Trumpian graft request, its not hard to believe that the reverse is sometimes true. Since e-mailing is effectively free there is not of a downside to keeping solication lists broad.
What? Efts don’t have wings. They’re strictly centrist.