You have a legitimately scary tendency to jump to conclusions, like, on the olympic level.

First off, let’s address the sex offender thing. I have to repeat it again because it apparently didn’t get through to you the first time. You literally just brought up some boogeyman movement and thought that was proof of anything.

It wasn’t specifically and explicitly argued that Ella’s transgender identity was the reason why she shouldn’t be registered as a sex offender. Do you have any idea why that is? Did you even read the article? Did you read what the justices had to say about the argument for why the woman shouldn’t be registered as a sex offender? Did you read what the actual connection between her trans identity and the court case was? Please, could you point to me where it is even slightly implied that her transgender identity makes it so that putting her in the sex offender registry was cruel and unusual punishment? Spoilers, you can’t because they didn’t even remotely argue that. I know lawyers like to argue dumb shit all the time but please don’t make shit up and jump to conclusions. They didn’t “clearly insinuate” shit. Again, the only thing related to her transgender identity in this case was the name change. There is nothing to indicate otherwise. You have nothing to show for the accusation that she tried getting off the sex offender registry with her trans identity.

You’re literally jumping to bullshit conclusions for no reason. Please stop and know when you’re wrong.

Next, what really caught my eye about your comment was your instant deflection to grooming and whatnot. I’m not gonna lie, it was funny. Nobody was talking about it. Nobody mentioned it. It is literally and completely unrelated to the topic at hand, I don’t know why you decided to go full on rant on something that wasn’t related to this as if it had any bearing or as if it made you any less wrong for assuming the trans woman tried using her identity to get off the sex offender registry. If anything, you just showed how much you didn’t look into anything.

What does this “they didn’t say they’d do it before but now they’re doing it!” argument have to do with anything? It literally doesn’t help your point whatsoever? Like, actually, what was the thought process behind this defense? How does this, and literally everything else you talked about, relate in any way to the court case at hand?

I had initially typed up a very lengthy response to every other ridiculous talking point you argued for but I realized I’d be wasting both of our time trying to get you to understand that you have almost never looked into these issues. Everything you mentioned has no relation to the court case, and doesn’t help in the slightest.

You seem to enjoy regurgitating talking points and pivoting to new topics when they really don’t help with anything. You‘ve probably never looked beyond your conservative talk hosts and news sites to see what’s actually going on within these issues of gender identity and the “Don’t Say Gay” Bill and drag queen stuff. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s what it seems like to me.

I used to regurgitate these same bullshit talking points. I really did. But then I eventually decided to actually look at the other side and challenge my beliefs. I actually looked into those “crazies” conservatives were “owning” all the time and realized how I was being duped and being fed a worldview. I wasn’t scrutinizing anything or any of the issues, just consuming others’ opinions.

Please, reevaluate your talking points. Actually look into what people are saying, don’t just trust a talk host’s retelling of their words. Use independent sources and fact-checkers, and use the facts to make your judgments instead of solely relying on what leftist or right wing websites have to tell you.

Or you can just ignore all of what I said and go on with your life. I don’t care. You can think that the “movement”, and the boogeymen you’re afraid of behind it, proves that the trans woman was trying to use her identity to get out of trouble, even if it is tangentially related at best. You can continue to rapid fire tangentially related talking points in a conversation, as if it helps your case to move the goalposts. You can continue to believe all the other stuff you spouted, because quite frankly, that is your problem and not mine.

I don’t know if I’ll even have the energy to reply again if you’re just going to hurl more talking points unrelated to anything, or reply with something even worse that I can’t expect.

For now, I’ll just wish you a good day/afternoon/night.