Could you please cite those exact laws you refer to? I've heard your claims in sensationalist media articles, but when I looked up the exact laws... they weren't quite what those activists claimed.

For example, "anti-LGBTQIA+ laws", has some sexual orientation been made illegal by a law again, as they were illegal in the past? Or does the law say that if you have a certain sexual orientation you are not allowed to do X Y? Was there something LGBT people were legally allowed to do and now due to these laws they no longer are?

And even "laws against teaching black history in a meaningful way"? I've never seen any law against teaching the history of black people in the USA, including slavery, the Civil War, the civil rights movement, etc. The only concrete events I've found weren't even laws, they were issues when a teacher taught children to judge each other by the color of each other's skin, teaching racists views like for example whites being born oppressors by their very nature, etc. and then angry parents pressured the school administration to put a stop to that.

So which exact law are you referring to? Unless you'd just point to a general proposition against enticing racial hatred, please tell me which law you mean, maybe I missed it.

Which rights did you previously have that are now being "stripped away"?

And please tell me one other time period or other civilization which you would rather have at your location, instead of the current one.

I never claimed there is nothing to improve. I was only against the idea of demolishing everything and being so conceited as to believe to be able to build a better one.

Lack of social structure fosters warlordism.

Check out any place and time on the planet where a region had no effective government. Would you want to live there?

Humans are flawed. But many humans also try to be good. No matter what kind of social structure you have or don't have, a certain percentage of humans will be assholes. If someone promised you that by breaking society apart and implementing their idea of a new system will bring out perfect utopia where every single human being will cooperate with everyone in everything without any issues, then you've been led on and you might unknowingly be serving an upstart dictatorship which will make things worse, much much worse. Several infamous systems in the past century started this way, which such promises...

Our current society (it seems almost every commenter here is from a country belonging to the "Western civilization" ), despite having some flaws we could work on to make it better, is still the civilization which gives the best quality of life and the most personal freedom to common people, across the entire human history, and it has been built up gradually over many many centuries. Anyone who denies that, denies basic reality, and shows an utter lack of knowledge about history.

If you want to completely demolish it and build something completely new out of the ashes, chances are the result will be much worse than what we have now.

Why do you have to be such an extremist about it? The vast majority of fat people would like to lose weight. The vast majority of deaf people would love to be able to hear. The vast majority of blind people would love to be able to see. Why do you want to force them to "embrace" it? Why do you want to forbid people from helping them?

Sure, if someone doesn't want that help, that choice should be available too. But don't take away that choice from those who want to use it.

If a guy who has never even suffered from gender dysphoria says he wants to be a woman and asks for advice, then it's a logical question to ask what exactly it even means to him to be a "woman", and what qualities of a woman is he really after, because people are different and answers might widely differ. (hey, that's a meaningful question to ask regardless of the antecedents). Without that, there can be no meaningful answer or advice.

It's much more despicable to just cheer such people up without thinking and peer pressure them to just go ahead (while name-calling everyone who doesn't do so), as a form of virtue signaling. We often see similar things around here when someone announces of thinking about becoming immobile. There is a crowd cheering them to go for it, because doing so satisfies their kink and that's more important for them than what happens to the other person. Thankfully, in the topic of immobility, now there are some reasoned voices, but in the trans case, there isn't. As soon as someone has even 1% doubt about their gender identity, a crowd shows up cheering for transitioning, as if they were a cult and applying peer pressure. And me not joining that cult doesn't make me a transphobe. Just like not cheering someone for becoming immobile doesn't make me fatphobic.

And I don't care about who has used what talking points (as long as they contain no expletives or otherwise highly offensive language). For example, if I believe that 2+2=4, then just because someone who I don't like also says it, be it even freaking Hitler himself, doesn't make it false. And if I know for a fact that surgical procedures carry a risk, I won't lie and pretend out of ideological reasons that they don't.

Trying to understand what one really wants is "transphobia"? Not instantly and blindly recommending full-on transitioning when the first thoughts appear about the topic is "transphobia"? Recommending people to first study themselves and their desires a little deeper before they make changes to themselves they later can't undo is "phobia"? Do you even know what that word means?
Don't be a such a jerk!

In this case what would it even mean for you to be a BBW? Just identifying as such? You would still be a biological male, so if it's mostly the body of a BBW what you're after, you won't get it merely by identifying as such. You could do extensive and risky plastic surgery, but even that won't give you the body of a BBW (proponents of such surgeries often over-exaggerate its effectiveness, because it's a lot of money for them in it, so of course they hide the drawbacks and present it as "perfect" ), and it's almost impossible to undo if you later change your mind.

Your fat distribution won't change by just identifying as female.

Would roleplay be an option instead?

This whimsical style of yours is so difficult to get right, and so many have tried and have fallen flat.

But you managed to master it with flying colors! It's really refreshing to read whatever you write, from silly stories to self-depreciating but still cute and wholesome desires.

What I'm more worried about is profiles which are not shameless cyberbeggars but genuine curious people, especially young women who have only recently learned about not everyone hating if they're overweight, and are looking for chatting and participating in a community, for a platform to explore and express themselves... slowly starting to open up, participating in genuine conversations... and then disappearing in a few weeks, most likely due to harassment (or unrequested sexual offers which end in harassment if refused).

(but even this has been ongoing for quite some time, so nothing new here, and the site will likely continue for a long long time without worries of having to close due to not enough participants)

The 5% error can be explained by the angle of the legs redirecting some of the force outwards. Therefore it will be never 100% accurate.