@earl-of-trumps said
Not true. I provided just one example, but there are more, of course. Look at how I worded my first line:
I came to the conclusion long ago - that some are attention seekers, some are opportunists, and some are legit.
I use the word "some" 3 times to show 2 different groups, so this is NOT me only having one example.
"Not true. I provided just one example"
I never assumed there is only one trans rapist in the entire world.
My argument stands: are you making a statement regarding an entire group of people based on the actions of few?
I even spoon fed you a helper analogy: Is it fair to make a judgement on all men based on the actions of a few pedophile cathpolic priests? Should men be forbidden from becoming priests?
"
I came to the conclusion long ago - that some are attention seekers, some are opportunists, and some are legit."
"Some americans are rapists, some are attention seekers, some are opportunists and some are legit" (whatever the fuk you mean by legit). Do you think there is something wrong with this statement?It's technically true, but does it communicate anything useful (other than the one issuing it has a problem with americans)?
"I use the word "some" 3 times to show 2 different groups, so this is NOT me only having one example."
You still don't get it, do you?
We don't have only one example of any conceivable thing of any conceiveable group. We don't have only one example of an irishman being an alcoholic. We don't have only one example of an american being a dumb redneck. We don't have only one example of any member of a group confirming any dumb stereotype or prejudice about that group. We don't make judgements on any group based on the actions of a few members of that group.
We know you're a raging transphobe. We know what point you're inching towards but you're too much of a coward to just come out and say it. I am just pointing out the debating mistakes you're making.
Try to be a raging transphobe while debating properly please.