Social Engineering: Proof That Media Exposure Can Warp Gender Identity In Adult Men

a reply to: Annee

Trolling as usual. What this the third thread I've observed you now that some 90% of your posts lacked substance, aside from just trolling. No ulterior motive on your part. Just an neutral objective outsider you be.

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I saw two teenage girls today that were dressed as if they were trying to look like boys and they were shopping for men's toiletries. It really seems like it's turned in to a way to get attention or some kind of style.

really?...how about the notion that they are shopping for a fathers day gift......

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I'm with you on this one man, we'll never let my little pony get us! EVER, NEVER EVER, DO Y'ALL UNDERSTAND!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

Trolling as usual. What this the third thread I've observed you now that some 90% of your posts lacked substance, aside from just trolling. No ulterior motive on your part. Just an neutral objective outsider you be.

Ah, yes, I know. I don't give you the answers you want.

Real factual information has been provided to you by several posters who actually do know what they are talking about.

A couple of them are transgender.

Yet, you "shut out" what they say and continue on with these bizarre accusations.

I don't normally click on threads like this. I just don't relate, I don't mind people into wierd stuff (I saw a docu long ago on people who liked to pretend to be horses. It seemed pretty harmless...). I have known a couple of trans.

But this week has been a bit strange. My husband came across a man from our village that was once a customer of mine and that I used to chat with a lot. He was dressed like a woman and wearing make up.
Well, he told me about it and we giggled a bit, but whatever - things change, people change!

But then today I was at the store and came across an elderly couple I see there often. They must be in their late 60's I guess. The husband was wearing tight pink womens pants though, and high heels. He is also wearing facepowder and blush. Besides that, they are acting totally normal, chatting over the vegetables, deciding what to buy for the day. For a second I wondered if the husband had a twin sister maybe.... but his voice was undeniably masculine.

I think, if I was in a different area, I would chalk this up to the media. It sounds like transexuals and crossdressing is such a big topic in the US right now.... but it hasn't been here! I'm in a very rural part of south france! Nobody knows Caitlyn Jenner, nor worries about who uses which bathroom.

It could just be a coincidence, two in one week... but I am sort of wondering if there couldn't be anything else at work in this trend? Hormones in plastics and water, for example. Because I don't see any women around here suddenly wanting to dress or look like men. (or perhaps they are an it just isn't as obvious?)

Hey! How many people browsing this thread can honestly and verifiably claim that over the past 12 years to have spent literally thousands of hours researching, and thousands of hours more (easily to the tune of 10,000+ hours combined) debating issues almost specifically centered around:
-Social Engineering
-Propaganda
-Indoctrination
-Brain Washing
-Neuroscience
-Psychology
-Social Psychology
-Developmental Psychology
-Mass Communications (from education to entertainment to news to social media)
*and plenty of other specific related subcategories relevant here

All of which specifically geared towards understanding all of that (and more not mentioned) in light of the way it all affects us all as individuals and as a civilization.

Well I can, and I can prove it.

Yet I've been too busy to debate for a few years, and I dont even have the time now, but the past week when it all hit me how hardcore this mass Social Group Warfare agenda is.... that's why I'm so off the charts about all this all the sudden. You got my attention targeting kindergartners, SJW insists we all must accept and conform to their uncompromising bigotry, and now I'm finally chiming in on the subject where I gotta get my piece in in a hurry and move on to my own. You wanted everybody's attention, now you got mine, yet you complain / insult / demagogue???

Your thread is well-made, but i regret ever reading it.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I was in the thread where you found out about the SJW movement, because you were being called an SJW ( in fact that meme with the unicorn was used against you which is where you grabbed it from) whilst harping that 1960's (spit on soldiers) sentiment on memorial day, calling us veterans "baby killers" , you're all over the place man, im not sure whats going on upstairs but I hope you get well and I mean that.

originally posted by: Bluesma
It sounds like transexuals and crossdressing is such a big topic in the US right now.... but it hasn't been here! I'm in a very rural part of south france! Nobody knows Caitlyn Jenner, nor worries about who uses which bathroom.

Just please understand Crossdressers and Transgenders are not even close to the same thing.

There are men who like to dress in women's clothing.

A transgenders brain (as do ours) tells them what Gender they are. But, their physical body is opposite.

I think its becoming more visible because homosexual have "broken down the doors", so to speak. People are feeling more free, and don't need to hide.

a reply to: TechniXcality
Yeah that was my first big debate thread in a few years so I was a bit rusty, yet still tore it up.

I wasn't calling all soldiers baby killers, I was quite specific towards the folks (civilians too [whether they would go fight or not]) that would admit that the wars are essentially all for empire (all of them since the 50's not 60's), and knowing babies get blown up, would still support such actions.

It wasn't spitting on soldiers. I was ranting about the politicians needlessly sending my countrymen to kill and get killed for false wars of aggression.

I also recall the premise there including lamenting all the millions of "Americans" who take it for granted like its the Forth of July (like they also take it for granted).

But you having been indoctrinated with emotional counter-interest there, and being offended by your preconception of what I was getting at you didn't absorb any of that. So now that the supposed SJW (for being anti-Imperialist) is now in here tearing down at the SJM, yeah that must be pretty confusing for you.

I must be strange: As whether it's little kids getting targeted by bombs overseas, or McDonalds targeting children so they're customers for life, or little kids getting targeted by social engineering over here, I will stand up for them no matter how unpopular my position might be. Ya F(#* with kids and the gloves are coming off!

originally posted by: Annee
Just please understand Crossdressers and Transgenders are not even close to the same thing.

You have happened to make that clear. But since they will get bullied too, and they do fall under the LGBTQRS, shouldn't they too get to use the "safe zone" girls room?

Just answer this somebody, already. I'm not going to stop asking it until you do, while avoiding it just weakens your position.

edit on 13-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
a reply to: TheBulk

Well, it's exactly what the OP is opining. Social Engineering. And I'll add: via psychological warfare.

And if One were to dig a little deeper, ALL LEGAL in the United Stockyard per an Executive Order by the Prez.. See Executive Orders. Psych Warfare tactics okay to use "for" the citizen in order to better provide services. I wish I was kidding, right after this I threw My arms up and typed FTW and I wasn't even laughing out loud. I'd link it up but it is VERY DEPRESSING so what would be the benefit? (plus I think that the reaction is part of the whole process) Just look at "Executive Orders" and it'll pop-up but again, it'll just piss You off. There was a thread on here about the Order, but if I recall it didn't get much action..

I guess too many folks started drinking bottled water or $7.00 cups of coffee and weren't getting their dose of fluoride so they went to Step #2- The Continuance of Window Shade- Keeping the Sheeple dumber than owl snip..

namaste

The Foal Truth

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Yep! Trying to get us all sucked into the mind warp too. You sneaky devil!

Do feel free to point out any logical fallacies on my part. Good luck with that.

Well, okay then, though this is far from exhaustive.

The first overarching problem is hasty generalization in assuming the examples you provide are some sort of representative sample of "bronies" or fans of the show, which they aren't. They stand out precisely because they are different. That in itself exposes the unrepresentative sample.

That, in turn, is offered as the foundation for the thesis that males who watch the show are somehow intentionally effeminized or indoctrinated into the LGBT movement by it, which is also unsubstantiated and, even in the exception cases given, not supported by logic.

That, in turn, is used as "proof" that My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, which was produced by Hasbro as a promotional tool for selling dolls to girls and unexpectedly attracted a sizable male fan base, is in fact "a sparklingly dripping example of media induced gender identity social engineering."

When challenged on the facts, you appeal to ignorance (auto-epistemic), citing your own unwillingness to study the very subject on which you based this thread. Then, ironically, you appeal to authority while simultaneously professing ignorance of the subject at hand.

That's far from everything, because you've thrown out all sorts of asides that don't seem relevant to the topic, but it's reasonably clear that the thesis of this thread falls apart under even light logical scrutiny.

To put it another way, if you were to create a similar thread about, say, The Lord of the Rings pushing a LGBT agenda and go on about the books without having read them, it would be painfully obvious to everyone who actually has read the books that you didn't know what you were talking about. That's what's going on here, except with ponies, and it's painfully obvious to anyone who actually watches the show.

As I said earlier, I'm not speaking to the LGBT thing, which is a whole different animal, so to speak, just addressing patently bogus claims about a show I enjoy. It's okay if you don't like it or suspect some sort of diabolical plot behind it, but I would hope, whatever your views, you could at least try not to be irrational about it.

Sometimes a pony is just a pony.

At last!

originally posted by: Majic
The first overarching problem is hasty generalization in assuming the examples you provide are some sort of representative sample of "bronies" or fans of the show, which they aren't. They stand out precisely because they are different. That in itself exposes the unrepresentative sample.

Well forgive me, but every article I read (including a couple fan sites) all had the same stereotypical jist as represented herein. From there, every time I've done a google image search over the past couple years since this came to my attention at least 95% of the examples have been the same (including big group photos).

Note that in my OP I laid out a clear testimonial quote that folks intent on watching it for joke fodder got sucked in too (not to mention several fans in this thread including you have suggested I keep watching it until it becomes 'truth' per se).

Okay, now that I've taken a closer look, I did find a couple photos from BronyCon where there were folks with regular clothes on.

Regardless, the sterotypical examples are the posterchildren of the movement, while the rainbow pony art theme is still the fandom (as proven by you no less).

That, in turn, is offered as the foundation for the thesis that males who watch the show are somehow intentionally effeminized or indoctrinated into the LGBT movement by it, which is also unsubstantiated and, even in the exception cases given, not supported by logic.

That, in turn, is used as "proof" that My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, which was produced by Hasbro as a promotional tool for selling dolls to girls and unexpectedly attracted a sizable male fan base, is in fact "a sparklingly dripping example of media induced gender identity social engineering."

Okay, fine, being rusty to debate, and having been in a rush to get that done genuinely not even having time, I shouldn't even be screwing around in this site lately, I rushed the entire piece in about 20 minutes. I'd say I did damn well all things considered, meanwhile, the stuff that got locked into the OP (where I had used up every last available character which interfered with edits), I've gone on to clarify in depth throughout the thread.

Anyways, I did provide in the OP clear testimonials of adult makes being 'transformed' after exposure to the media (even to their own surprise).

I could have spent more time wording the Brony thing as evidence that this gender identity warping stuff is entirely possible (which I have shown by now), which in light of the clear and present LGTB movement social engineering agenda (or the governments agenda of it, however you want to put it)... this is serious stuff.

When challenged on the facts, you appeal to ignorance (auto-epistemic), citing your own unwillingness to study the very subject on which you based this thread. Then, ironically, you appeal to authority while simultaneously professing ignorance of the subject at hand.

I never said I was unwilling to research anything. Thats FALSE.

Nor did I claim to be an expert on Bronyism or LGTB.

Yet that doesn't make me too incompetent to make a strong case (as even the apparent transgenders folks herein didn't even know the proper universal definition, which I was mostly able to surmise it correctly without having even go read wikipedia in advance of all this). How this is me Appealing to Ignorance you're going to have to explain that much better lest you be grasping at straws.

But from this last page I did claim to be a de facto expert on social engineering type subject matter, which you've gleaned from the back page here in somewhat cherry picked towards your grand ol 'debunker' piece. I will say its refreshing as you might be the first person I've debated in my recent revisit that seemed to have ever even heard of a "fallacy".

So in review, being a bit rusty, and after rushing the OP, in the pages since I've gone on in detail to explain and demonstrate my position, which unless someone could clear this issue up directly (instead of a quazi-Ad Hominem depuff piece) as eloquently as you put it here, I'd say I've still got something here.

You apparently only cherry picking from the front and back pages would almost seem to show you being unwilling to research the issue, which wouldn't be such a sin if that wasn't one you've erroneously applied to me.

GG

PS: Note that the thread went all haywire as multiple pro-trans-restroom people, messy debates with them spilled over into this thread early on. Lots of trolling. This issue in this context wasn't just a simple walk thru the Brony park, there's that big messy restroom/LGTB social engineering agenda as part of the context here. I wish I had in my life 3+ days to assemble this into the perfect piece in advance, but I dont, while this is but a microcosm of the bigger picture...

We really do need to STOP judging people by looks, hobbies, interests, religion, ALL of this crap!

SO WHAT IF PEOPLE LIKE MY LITTLE PONY???

Who DOESN'T like stuffed animals? Most "Car Enthusiasts" like them, the proper Interior Decor of ANY car requires stuffed animals!

Racers and hot rodders have their stuffed toys. Even the garbage truck guys have their stuffed animals, adorning the outside of their trucks and all.

You wanna call one of those guys a Nancy Boy?

Try that and report back to us.

Toy Story

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I'm not really interested in getting sucked into some sort of point/counterpoint back-and-forth, since they tend to be tedious and self-indulgent. So if that's where this is headed, I hope to disappoint.

I also want to emphasize that I fully respect your right to believe whatever you want, whether I consider it true or false. God knows it's a right I exercise a lot myself.

I do think you're wrong about the show, because I've studied it in depth, watched every episode and am just not seeing the agenda you're alleging. I'm a big enough fan that I follow the twitter accounts of the people who produce the show and have a good understanding of how it's made, by whom, and where (Los Angeles, CA; Vancouver, BC and Manila, Philippines).

I know who the producers are, who the directors are, the layout supervisors, writers, voice cast, music producers, storyboarders, etc. Not everyone, of course, but enough to have a good idea of who does what and how they do it. They are, without exception, inspiring, fascinating people who remind me of the kind of people I used to work with.

Each member of the cast and crew has their own opinions, of course, and unsurprisingly for the entertainment industry, there are plenty of liberals to be found. But there's just no evidence of any sort of agenda other than that of producing a great show based on the idea that "friendship is magic". And selling toys, of course.

Anything anyone wants to add to that comes from them, not the show.

This is hardly the first time this subject has come up. Indeed, the dialog (including the "love and tolerance" meme) already began even before the first episode aired on October 10, 2010 and it's been beaten to death ever since.

Eventually, even the most hard-headed critics tend to soften once they start looking at the facts rather than trafficking in innuendo, but as the saying goes...

You can't see if you don't look.

Just sayin'

originally posted by: Majic
To put it another way, if you were to create a similar thread about, say, The Lord of the Rings pushing a LGBT agenda and go on about the books without having read them, it would be painfully obvious to everyone who actually has read the books that you didn't know what you were talking about. That's what's going on here, except with ponies, and it's painfully obvious to anyone who actually watches the show.

I've been thru well over 50 pages of debates the past weeks or so. Repeatedly I've challenged or have seen challenged what a "transgender" person "is", and the consensus, when'd they'd actually address it, was this clear picture: 'a person who doesn't feel like they are in the right gender body, whom MUST then transform their body in order to "feel" happy (despite the fact it causes various mental illness as a result of the social dynamics and what have you).

So, in the OP, that was the version I was running with. You can see in my post log the past week or so, the few threads their pages I was in, and see them beat on this drum again and again (the John Hopkins thread in particular).

I framed it along the lines of the ATS transgender members explanation of it, although its not so precise as they have been framing it to demagogue your website (as per wikipedia). From them I drew out the parallel (which I explained loudly in the first page here), which this Brony pink glitter rainbow unicorn dress lifestyle would still effectively fall under transgender/LGBTQ banner, I do believe.

originally posted by: Majic
I do think you're wrong about the show, because I've studied it in depth, watched every episode and am just not seeing the agenda you're alleging. I'm a big enough fan that I follow the twitter accounts of the people who produce the show and have a good understanding of how it's made, by whom, and where (Los Angeles, CA; Vancouver, BC and Manila, Philippines).

I know who the producers are, who the directors are, the layout supervisors, writers, voice cast, music producers, storyboarders, etc. Not everyone, of course, but enough to have a good idea of who does what and how they do it. They are, without exception, inspiring, fascinating people who remind me of the kind of people I used to work with.

Each member of the cast and crew has their own opinions, of course, and unsurprisingly for the entertainment industry, there are plenty of liberals to be found. But there's just no evidence of any sort of agenda other than that of producing a great show based on the idea that "friendship is magic". And selling toys, of course.

This would seem to demonstrate you as not being an objective source on the matter of the show. No?

Okay folks, here goes the one of the most important documentary any person in (at least) the "Western World" could ever watch. It has nothing to do with gender, or sex, or Bronies, etc.

Its all about the history, the chronological evolution of PR (public relations) / social engineering / propaganda etc here in the US, and how it was used to shape the social landscape of the nation over multiple generations (until about Y2K). If you want to have any real idea of not merely how 'the world' is, but how it got to being this way (since about 1920) this is it:

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No one is an objective source on anything, and I certainly am not.

That's what all those opinions I posted mean.