work from home bodyguard

i don't contribute anything artistically here because i don't want a nazi car salesmans AI taking it for his meat grinder, find me on igna dot bsky dot social if you wanna check out my photography

@AEGroupSocial @nyaraVT okay so women that have a masculine physical appearance aren't women?

@nyaraVT if you're female, then you don't have to "Debate it", it will be obvious. Pretty much everyone has a imbalanced mixture of estrogen and testosterone. (Yes, both males and females have it. Get use to it.) So, you clearly do not look female enough for people to know you were

It’s crazy how as a trans woman I’m just expected to “debate” my existence and validity as a woman, while governments criminalise our healthcare There is no nuance to be had when the media and politicians want us dead, but I’m supposed to convince every transphobe of my position

@ThatOneFFox @esteryrose @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT incredibly lazy, bad faith argument. not only is being tall is an external characteristic that everyone can observe, but even the concept of 'tall' is a social construct. if you're the last person left alive, then tall and short no longer exist, as there's no one to compare to

@esteryrose @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT It's not obtuse to reject a lie

@NEO_LaXoN @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT at least two people in the replies have done exactly that. 'trans doesn't exist' is becoming an increasingly popular sentiment amongst bigots. try again

@evilpostmaker @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT Nobody is denying that they exist lmao, massively manipulative rhetoric

@ThatOneFFox @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT denying that they're women is denying their existence as women

@evilpostmaker @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT no, Nobody seases to exist just cus someone doesn't call them a woman

@PeopleofEarth12 @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT that's not a fact, trans women are women

@evilpostmaker @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT Are we? Because the fact is, they don’t exist as women, at all. They’re men. When someone makes a claim that is categorically untrue, they are going to be expected to explain themselves, especially if they demand everyone go along with it.

@VeilRipper @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT being president is external, not internal, false equivalence

@evilpostmaker @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT The president of the United States is a social construct. I identify as the president of the United States and now wish for everyone to treat me as such. The first part is fine but the part where you want others to change their behavior to accommodate you is not

@ceraralaz_art @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT cool, the current medicsl concensus is that trans people exist

@evilpostmaker @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT Existence is not negotiable and do not need a debate, but nobody should expect congruency if their opinion doesn’t meet conventional science

@x90u3 @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT no one made the claim that you can change sex, so no idea what you're talking about

@evilpostmaker @vladuhat999 @nyaraVT Yes you exist. No you can't change sex. How is this denying existence?

@PonderHart @xagreat right, it's 2AM here, & you're responding all over the place, and in a way that doesn't even give me a chance to begin starting my refutations. i'm trying to use > to indicate i'm not finished, i also refuse to give money to the moron who runs this site, so my replies are limited

That doesn’t weaken the case. No one claims Papias of Hierapolis was an eyewitness, the point is he had access to eyewitness sources, which he explicitly says he sought out. And Irenaeus of Lyons isn’t “too late”, he’s linked to Polycarp, who knew John. That’s a direct chain, not distant legend. Also, the fact he’s defending four Gospels shows they were already established, not invented by him. By ancient standards, that’s early, connected, and consistent testimony.

Paul never met Jesus, but he wrote half of the Bible. Lol

@PonderHart @xagreat he's not an eyewitness irenaeus is even worse, he's 80-120 years after christ, and writing in a context where a four gospel framework is already being defended theologically. >

@PonderHart @xagreat the issue isn’t simply whether Papias and Irenaeus are “early” in a general sense, it’s whether they are close enough and well-sourced enough to establish authorship. papias is writing 40-60 years after the events, and crucially: he explicitly says he prefers oral reports>

@PonderHart @xagreat as for "living transmission" i'd simply challenge the reliability of oral transmission, even within the span of a few decades. stories can change significantly over very short periods of time.

@PonderHart @xagreat - there’s early, independent, and consistent external attestation. by contrast, the gospels don't identify their authors explicitly, and the external attestations are later and not independent of emerging church tradition.

@PonderHart @xagreat ultimately, pitre is *way* behind the times for most historians. even the majority of biblical scholars have given this theory up decades ago. there simply isn't the evidence for it.

@PonderHart @xagreat 4: if you base your dating of the gospels by taking Jesus' prophecy at face value, you're already assuming that jesus is god and the bible is god's word. this means you're not an objective investigator and your conclusions are untrustworthy.

@PonderHart @xagreat i never said the apostles or even the first disciplies sought to benefit, but the church as an institution absolutely does

That argument only works if the people at the start actually gained power from the claim, they didn’t. From the beginning, Christians had no status, no protection, no political leverage, just risk. And we’re not talking about a few isolated cases, but hundreds of early Christian martyrs across the first three centuries who went to their deaths rather than deny what they believed they had seen. People might die for something mistaken, but not for something they know is a fabrication they invented. And the timeline matters. Christianity didn’t become aligned with imperial power until the 4th century under Constantine the Great. By then, the original witnesses, the apostles and the first generation, were long gone. So you can’t say they created a “lie” to gain power, because there was no power to gain in their lifetime, only persecution. So the claim falls apart historically, the movement begins with suffering and martyrdom, not influence and control.