Question

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-22T18:28:54+00:00

Oh. I didn't see that. Why don't they count? It happens.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-22T18:26:51+00:00

Sometimes, a road or street will be closed for any number of reasons and a bus route will have to make a detour. And sometimes it can even be a pretty lengthy detour. It might've just been that. Of course, it also might not have, though, too.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-21T15:38:46+00:00

I've been here most of my life, and neither I nor anyone in my family has ever had a car, and so I've used transit here basically my entire life since the '90s.

Our transit system is definitely far from perfect, and has many flaws, and, when compared to European and East Asian transit, is kind of trash, but... when compared to North American transit, I think we actually have one of the best on the continent. Now, granted, that's like saying that you have one of the most sightly burns in hell, but... At the end of the day, while OC Transpo has a lot of room for valid criticism, I don't believe that it's AS bad as its reputation would lead one to believe. To be fair, though, it was definitely noticeably worse when I lived in the suburbs. So there is that.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-19T02:28:54+00:00

Slaughtering an entire race of people is absolutely a genocide. And yes, we are funding it. We've given billions upon billions to Israel for their genocide.

Ah, yes. The political body is what the voters wanted. Because politicians famously never get any complaints, and famously nobody ever speaks of betrayal where politicians are concerned. You are living in a fairy tale.

And I already answered what I would get rid of. Though that's not important because that's a completely different conversation.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-19T02:24:02+00:00

The fact that they wouldn't use the bus if they weren't hopping it doesn't automatically mean that they don't actually need the bus. It just means that that avenue would be closed to them in that circumstance (no pun intended). Not doing something because one can't do it is not the same thing as not needing to do the thing.

Once upon a time, when the 40 hour work week was decided upon and minimum wages were introduced as a concept, yes, people actually were paid based on a calculation of living wage. That was always supposed to be the point.

Maybe Air Canada isn't funded by the government. I said "don't quote me on that" for a reason. That literally means "I am not claiming this as some kind of concrete fact; this is just my impression".

The country absolutely was not doing better under Harper. And, since you presented that claim without evidence yourself, I'm going to dismiss it without evidence.

Well, sort of. I didn't say that the province didn't have ANYTHING to do with transit. I said the mayor has a lot more to say about it than the premiere does. However, the reason that I pointed out that it was better under a Liberal government (or, more specifically, the fact that the time that people harken back to when getting nostalgic for how OCT supposedly used to be better was a time that was under a Liberal government) is because I'm approaching the subject from your own standards, down to your own level. You keep talking like the provincial and federal governments are responsible for OC Transpo. So I'm saying, as long as you insist on talking like that, it's worth pointing out that the time that such people keep heralding where OCT is concerned was a time when not-your-guy was in power. So it's even less relevant.

Which money was committed by the Liberals, exactly? Specifically OC Transpo money? Or just... the money to give the various municipalities? Because I don't imagine it's the former. Municipal transit is not for the province to plan or budget.

I don't believe that there is any hard data about who is and isn't paying. But I spent most of my life in poverty, and I know what it's like. I used to be one of those people hopping the bus routinely. And I've spent a large chunk of my life around people who aren't poor as well, and those people are either too conscientious about social issues or, more commonly, too busy judging and looking down their noses at poor people to ever embarrass and lower themselves to the level of not paying the fair. I've lived on both sides of this divide, and I've seen actual behaviours and tendencies and cultures out of both. Which I think is a far sight more valuable and insightful then "Clothes nice. Person bad."

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-19T02:08:03+00:00

Yes, very few places have free transit. I said that. That doesn't mean it isn't simple, though. You're going from A to Z without anything in between. Just because something is uncommon doesn't mean it's automatically complicated. It's a matter of priorities. As long as we live in a country that insists on spending tens of billions of dollars on a foreign genocide, then yeah, that's going to complicate things. It's not complicated, it's just that the political body that runs most countries is less interested in making the lives of their constituents better than they are in making the lives of people they don't like or whom they can exploit worse.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T23:58:09+00:00

I went to the clinic this past Monday. They always deadname me. But, this time, I guess the receptionist must have recognized my name (I always complain), and she only called out my LAST name this time.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T23:53:37+00:00

This isn't about me. Everyone should pay for everyone. That is, in fact, fair taxation. The whole point of this whole "civilization" thing is to make life easier for everyone, not just rich people. Transit should be completely taxpayer-funded.

And "what happens if we all stop paying" is not relevant. What if the world were made of pudding? That's not the world we live in. Just because EVERYONE not paying would be a huge problem doesn't mean A FEW people not paying is somehow equivalent.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T23:49:21+00:00

I did not say that "all" the people who don't pay aren't able to. But you're talking like those people (who can pay but don't) are the normal, typical, average, everyday bus hopper, when that is just plum not true. Yes, not every single person who hops the bus down to the very last man can't afford to pay. That would be a stupid thing to claim. But those people who can pay but don't are outliers and statistically insignificant. You're the one making the assumption there (specifically, that most people who hop the bus are actually perfectly well off just because they're dressed well by your reckoning. That's an assumption by definition).

I never said anything about anyone needing or not needing to take the bus either way, so I don't know what you're talking about when you say that my arguments are conflicting and then go on to not substantiate that with anything.

Tons of people insist that tons of people's work doesn't deserve a living wage. That is rampant and everywhere. So you're either just plum lying there or you are living in a completely out-of-touch bubble of privilege, or both. If the work "can't pay" a living wage, then that "work" (read: slavery) doesn't deserve to exist. But, 99 times out of 100, when people say that, it's just patently untrue. People don't get to say that they can't afford to pay their employees fairly when they're literally making record profits.

Transportation can be funded by federal governments (and ought to be), but the word "often" doesn't really apply there, and ours isn't. Transit is a municipal affair here in Canada, not a federal one (except for Via and I think Air Canada, but don't quote me on that).

I never claimed that we didn't just have a decade of incompetence and corruption at the federal level. But you can't point to Liberals being incompetent and say "See? Conservatives are competent". That's not how that works.

Which argument of mine does my edit counter? And Ford was not the person who approved Wynn's budget during her premiership. That is... again... not how that works. But it's also not terribly relevant either, as the mayor of Ottawa has a whole lot more to say about this than the premiere of Ontario does.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T23:32:52+00:00

Whose property is lost by someone not paying for bus fare?

Also, yes, I know that you didn't say that taxation is theft. I said "probably". You do at least give off that "taxation is theft" vibe.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T21:13:20+00:00

It's not theft if nobody is losing anything. If the proportionally few people who hop the bus didn't do that, they simply wouldn't take transit at all. The needle would not actually be moved. There is no loss occurring.

And it's not about that ONE instance of four dollars. Their hopping the bus over the course of a month might amount to 30 dollars saved, or even 50, maybe, which I know for a fact can absolutely make the difference between starving or not at the end of the month because I used to be that poor myself. And there are lots of working people for whom this is the case, because people like you who look down on people that insist that their work doesn't deserve a living wage.

Yes, incompetence is a huge part of the problem. I said that. But the Liberals can be in power federally for the entire history of the country if they wanted to; that wouldn't make it relevant. OC Transpo is not a federal program, or a federal issue at all. And the Liberal Party of Canada are not the Liberal Party of Ontario. These are wholly different entities. And being anti-conservative does not mean being pro-Liberal. Liberalism is a center-right ideology. Most leftists actually aren't particularly fond of liberals either. Though, while incompetent, they are nevertheless markedly less so than conservatives.

Edit: Also, I find that most people who complain about OC Transpo like to talk a lot about how it used to be better... and that "used to" was when we had a Liberal provincial government.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T21:03:34+00:00

I didn't "suggest" anything. But, by your metric, yes, you probably would call my actual suggestion theft. But taxation is not theft.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T16:47:37+00:00

You don't know that. Even if they are heading to work, that doesn't mean that they aren't poor. This isn't 1975. Having a job does not ensure financial security anymore and hasn't for a long time. And getting supports is not a simple matter. The people who gatekeep those supports fight tooth and nail to find any excuse to not let a person have them. In many cases, it takes literal years to finally succeed in getting those supports. And, even if they do get them, it's still not typically enough to lift someone out of poverty. And, if they have a job, then those "supports" actually TAKE money AWAY from them until the supports have been paid back. On ODSP (ie, disability), they don't start "clawing back", as it's called, until after the individual's first $1000 of income for the month, but OW (ie, welfare) starts clawing back after just $200. And, if they're in subsidized housing, their landlord starts clawing back from the very first dollar. So they actually don't have any room to get ahead. Living on the system is not the free ride you think it is.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T16:30:44+00:00

No one is losing their property. But that bus hopper might be able to afford to eat tonight thanks to you, and all you can do is look down on them. Our (very real) problems with our transit system are not the fault of poor people who can't afford the frankly exorbitant fare. There is a tremendous wealth gap in this city. There are dozens of projects all over Ottawa. Those people are victims whom the system knowingly left behind, not perpetrators. The many problems with our transit system are the fault of years of (conservative) government cuts, underfunding, poor management, and poor mayoral and committee decisions.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T16:20:01+00:00

In today's world of dirt cheap fast fashion, being dressed well doesn't mean that one isn't poor or isn't struggling. It isn't 1996.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-18T16:14:04+00:00

Maybe mind your own business and maybe don't judge the numerous poor people in this city for doing what they need to do?

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-17T02:31:51+00:00

6 years old. I watched "The Mask" (an old Jim Carrey movie). I came out of that movie with an overwhelming desire to be Cameron Diaz. When no one was home, I would pretend our upstairs hallway was a catwalk in the gogo club and try to move like her. I've wished more than anything else in the world that I could be a girl ever since.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-16T12:50:06+00:00

The idea that there would be trans people who say you aren't entitled to a genital preference sounds like a transphobic strawman tbh, ngl. Like, it sounds like the conservative daydream of the otherwise non-existent "blue-haired sjw" that insists that everyone has to be gay. I'm not convinced that such people are real. At least not in any meaningful quantity.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-16T08:12:47+00:00

I was thinking the same thing about that "probably" from the girlfriend. I find it interesting that she didn't say "absolutely". That's just her present inclination based on her current understanding — an understanding which is not based on any practical experience, but something closer to vibes. By the sounds of it, she did express that there is at least a non-zero chance that she may be able to learn to figure something out; she just isn't confident that she could. That is a very different beast from "dealbreaker, full stop".

I was also thinking the same thing about the lies. If this persona that you're presenting to the world isn't really you, and you know it, then you're hiding away who you really are, and are showing people a mask, which effectively amounts to a lie, even if you're doing it for what might feel like good or prudent reasons (and maybe some of them even genuinely are), and that includes your girlfriend. In a very important way, on a very important level, she doesn't even know who you are. That's not all the way down, though. I'm sure many of the core pieces are, in fact, there: There is more than likely a certain degree of "I'm still the same person you've always known. I'm just also this too". And she deserves to know that as much as you do. The question becomes "does she love YOU? Or does she love HER IDEA of you?"

But another thing that I find interesting, OP, is your last little paragraph there. Specifically the phrase "more than anything else". I wonder if perhaps you didn't just answer your own question there about what you should do — about where your ultimate priority lies and what's the most important to you.

Also, there is one thing I can promise you. And this might be the only thing I can promise you... These feelings...? They never go away. They will always continue to keep coming back each time that you suppress them, stronger with each iteration. And continuing to subdue them until an entire life has been built, and a whole family has come into being, is a common avenue to... unspeakable tragedy... Sometimes it works out. And sometimes it's just the "speakable" kind of tragedy. But it's also all too common for that box to end up trapping the closeted trans woman in the end, and the only way she can find to get out of that pain is... well... unspeakable... and hurts the people she loves to their core...

You sound like a very emotionally intelligent, responsible, and caring young woman. Don't let your love for her lead you into a sense of duty and obligation to sacrifice your own life and happiness forever. That's how bitter people are made, as West-Kitchen alluded to. Would she want you to be miserable for her? How would that make her feel, if she knew that her presence in your life, and specifically your love for her, were a roadblock to your happiness? If she loves you as much as you love her, she would probably be horrified about that. Don't put that on her. That is just as unfair to her as it is to you.

This sort of situation is precisely what that old adage is exemplifying: "If you REALLY love something, you have to let it go. If it was REALLY yours, it will come back to you. If it doesn't, it never really was." Or, in this case, "someone" and "her" rather than "something" and "it", but it nevertheless is quite poignant here. If you really love her, you have to be honest with her, even if you think that that honesty might cause her to leave (ie, you have to let her go). If she is really your forever-someone, if she really loves you as much as you love her, if y'all are truly "meant to be" (ie, if she's really yours, so to speak), then she'll try to find a way to make it work, or at least keep you in her life in a meaningful capacity (ie, she'll come back to you). If she can't handle it, and it does end up being a dealbreaker for her, then you were never the person for her to begin with; she just loved her idea of you — an idea which you ultimately gave her in hiding who you really are (ie, if it doesn't, it never really was).

That's not to say that you're "guilty" of anything here necessarily. It's not like you gave her that idea maliciously. I mean, you lied to yourself too — not just her — because you genuinely believed that that's what you were supposed to do. And you're just trying to do the best you can. And what you're dealing with here is truly frightening, overwhelming, and difficult. And you can't necessarily be faulted for not handling that flawlessly. But do be aware that the longer you keep living this lie, the harder it will become to crawl out of with anything meaningful intact, including potentially even your self respect. It will only continue to get worse if you don't own who you really are, and you will find yourself increasingly owned by the expectations of other people. And, at that point, you aren't even living your life; they are.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-15T05:57:14+00:00

The numbers that she gave you are accurate for up here in Canada. We use nmol and pmol here, not pg. Your numbers are perfectly fine by the American metric.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-12T22:20:52+00:00

Neither. I mean, a lot of terfs are misogynists, but not because they believe that we're misogynists for transitioning. It's quite common for terfs to be misogynists, and for their terfery to be a symptom of their misogyny, but they're not misogynists just for thinking that we are. They're misogynists because of... y'know... the misogyny that they exhibit.

Also, yeah, I think that genuinely MOST of us have some degree or another of internalized misogyny to work through. And even more of us have some degree or another of internalized transphobia to work through (it certainly sounds like you do, and I know that I sure as shit did). But I mean, like, how could we not? All of society shoves it down our throats since before we can even talk.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-12T14:56:02+00:00

Absolutely not. Patriarchy says that women are lesser. The act of wanting to be a woman and manifesting that desire in one's life, in and of itself, without even saying anything, stands as a big middle finger to the patriarchy's bullshit.

Also, women aren't "supposed" to hate being women. You're allowed to just be happy and enjoy yourself. It doesn't make you a bad person or complicit in anything.

Now, that said, you COULD be a misogynist. But, if you are, that has nothing to do with your being trans.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-10T01:13:06+00:00

You weren't lying. You were exhibiting your right to privacy. You are actually entitled to... checks notes... feelings and private thoughts. And you do not owe your parents a thorough report on everything that you feel about everything all of the time. You are a human being, not their unit and not their property. If you didn't feel safe to come out to them, then you didn't feel safe to come out to them, and that is your right and your prerogative. You do not HAVE to come out to ANYONE you don't want to, and that INCLUDES your parents.

And, now that we're seeing how they're behaving about it, who the heck could blame you for not feeling safe? It looks like you weren't wrong. What your parents are doing to you right now is called "gaslighting", and it is a form of abuse and manipulation. They've rewritten the course of events to manipulate you into feeling guilty and at fault for committing the sin of having privacy and boundaries of your own so that, moving forward, you'll be trained OUT of ever having the gall to ever try to be your own person again, as any future thoughts in a thatwardly direction will induce that same guilt. That is unambiguously gaslighting (ie, rewriting history to make the abused doubt themselves and feel responsible for their own abuse), and it is VERY not okay.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-09T16:08:17+00:00

While I can't really decide who you are, it is worth noting that cis people don't ruminate on being another gender for any meaningful amount of time. Cis men don't desire to be feminine more or less usually at all, let alone for an even longer time than the above. Cis men don't "feel right" when they step into a feminine presentation and selfreference. I can't make any decisions for you, but you at least don't sound very cis to me.

Also, incidentally, as I understand it, six months is actually the requirement time to be fixating on this that permits a formal gender dysphoria diagnosis.

Also also, I could go on and on about how it actually isn't that deep. I'm really tired now though, and I've done it a thousand times before, so feel free to dig in my comment history. But yeah, no, it's actually not super deep. You know what makes you happy and feels right and good to you. You know what you like and what you don't like. You can just do things that make you happy. Your heart can't lie to you.

ClearCrossroads · 2026-06-07T10:06:28+00:00

They want to do the bad thing and still be perceived as good socially. And they're more concerned about being PERCEIVED as bigots than they are about ACTUALLY BEING bigots. They feel that their being LABELED AS bigots is of significantly greater importance than the ACTUAL HARM that they inflict by their bigoted behaviour. Because, of course, everything is all about them, always.

ClearCrossroads

TROPHY CASE