|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
And this comment in particular demonstrates BJ's (very frequent) self-victimization on this message board.
On July 02 2023 12:46 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 10:10 NewSunshine wrote:On July 02 2023 07:01 ChristianS wrote:On July 02 2023 06:31 BlackJack wrote:
Whether or not you feel like what you’re experiencing is the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2 doesn’t make it objectively true. If pointing out absurdist statements as having “no basis in reality” counts as vitriol then I’m guilty as charged. If you want to vent about your lived experience of being persecuted that’s for the Blogs section. If you want to make bold statements like conservatives are celebrating Nazis that beat trans people or the US is a police state in the Politics thread you should expect people to disagree. Plasmids response to Drone is far more of a non sequitur than my post to Plasmid. Did I miss “the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2” or are you making that up? There’s plenty in plasmid’s post I’m not convinced is true, that’s not what I’m calling vitriolic. It’s shit like “the last time you posted here” and then dragging out an old argument you had – an argument in which, if I remember correctly, you demanded evidence of a claim or else you thought mod action was needed. I thought you were coming on too strong then, and said so; I definitely think you’re coming on too strong now. If you still want evidence, by the way, here, I googled it and found a study. I won’t pretend I have the skills to evaluate that study critically – crime statistics are absolutely not my area – but I will say what I’ve heard from a couple trans friends is that random hostility from strangers is not uncommon, it’s getting worse, and the way they talk is increasingly dehumanizing. And that’s in places like CA, Seattle, or Portland. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be trans in the middle of Idaho or Florida or West Virginia. In a vacuum, it's fine to say that in a discussion forum people should expect some level of rigor. In practice, you end up coming across like a dick when you appoint yourself as gatekeeper of factual debate, forbid any emotions from anyone participating in the discussion, and demand research receipts for everything. Among other things, this is what got people irritated to hell and back with Danglars, now banned. He burned all the good will in any discussion because people were instantly wrong to have any strong feelings on a subject, and being wrong, they needed to be condescended to and patronized accordingly. Here we have an actual trans woman relaying her experiences in the US, which were so bad she had to leave the country, and describing how she feels regarding LGBTQ+ developments in the US. If you're interested in understanding people with differing viewpoints to yourself, this is the part where you shut up and listen, and give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they know the first thing they're talking about. Blackjack instead jumped on it as an opportunity to question the validity of her feelings, and argue that she can't possibly be justified in feeling the way she feels because it isn't backed up by data that he likes. Way to make her point there, my dude. Calling the US a police state and saying the conservative base is cheering on Nazis assaulting trans people is not “relaying a personal experience.” If you want to relay a personal experience and be free of criticism it can be done in Blogs. If you want to say scurrilous things about a group of people or a country in the Politics thread people have a right to question it. It’s one or the other. To be fair plasmid isn’t even the one using their identify to deflect criticism of their claims, that’s what other people are doing for them. This is everything that’s wrong with political discourse in this country. People in this thread thinking it’s fine and dandy to attack conservatives as Nazi-loving transphobes and then use identity politics to shut down any disagreement.
No one here is making the argument that, because someone is a transgender person, they should not face criticism. Absolutely no one. This claim of BJ is completely false and unsubstantiated, and it can only be a result of BJ engaging in bad faith interpretation of people's comments.
plasmidghost has presented actual evidence for their claims, which BJ is completely ignoring. He has never addressed any of it and he keeps circling the evidence in favor of his accusation against plasmid. When the evidence is presented, BJ does - contrary to what would be expected from actual good faith argumentation - not address it honestly and incorporate it into the argument at large, but instead paints himself as the victim of identity politics gone awry. Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation.
This is wholly being done in bad faith. I can't possibly consider this a genuine form of argumentation.
BJ is not a victim in this board, yet portrays himself as such over and over again. Which I find especially bizarre this time considering the person he's criticizing is a real victim of real perpetration.
|
not just any of these groups, but literally the one facing some of the worst discrimination in the whole world
What?? Yes, it is not easy to be Trans in the west, but compare it to being:
-Ukranian in the occupied territories
-Uyughur in China
-Kurd in Turkey
I even recently read a horrible article about how the Tater culture was methodically erased by the Norwegian government over ~90 years. The agency which conducted this did not close its operations until 1986(!) Afaik, most other countries have done similar things to vulnerable minorities.
I know it is Pride month, but I feel it is important to remember that there is worse oppression going on in the world.
|
On July 02 2023 18:04 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +not just any of these groups, but literally the one facing some of the worst discrimination in the whole world What?? Yes, it is not easy to be Trans in the west, but compare it to being: -Ukranian in the occupied territories -Uyughur in China -Kurd in Turkey I even recently read a horrible article about how the Tater culture was methodically erased by the Norwegian government over ~90 years. The agency which conducted this did not close its operations until 1986(!) Afaik, most other countries have done similar things to vulnerable minorities. I know it is Pride month, but I feel it is important to remember that there is worse oppression going on in the world.
Sure, but that doesn't mean to ignore the slightly less bad oppression.
There is always a worse evil, and usually that worse evil is conveniently far away and not really that easy to deal with from here. Which is then used as an excuse to lay back and not do anything about the problems here, because "look at the worse thing over there".
|
On July 02 2023 18:04 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +not just any of these groups, but literally the one facing some of the worst discrimination in the whole world What?? Yes, it is not easy to be Trans in the west, but compare it to being: -Ukranian in the occupied territories -Uyughur in China -Kurd in Turkey I even recently read a horrible article about how the Tater culture was methodically erased by the Norwegian government over ~90 years. The agency which conducted this did not close its operations until 1986(!) Afaik, most other countries have done similar things to vulnerable minorities. I know it is Pride month, but I feel it is important to remember that there is worse oppression going on in the world.
At the risk of me wasting my breath: I specifically worded it in this way to make sure that your specific response would not be considered valid criticism of what I said, and yet somehow I managed to invoke that exact invalid criticism. I don't know if this is just me not using sufficiently precise and comprehensive language, or what else seems to be the issue? Should I add a full-length essay of remarks underneath my comments addressing every conceivable angle of misinterpretation ahead of time every time?
I said "some of the worst discrimination", not "the worst discrimination". Is the difference not immediately obvious? Is it my fault and I have to adjust the way I write?
|
You could add "in the West", but then why have the US politics thread anymore for that implication?
|
On July 02 2023 19:05 Uldridge wrote:
You could add "in the West", but then why have the US politics thread anymore for that implication?
Indeed I could've added that for further clarification. I'm not sure if that would've made my argument stronger or if it's perhaps even irrelevant. Transgender people are among the most discriminated groups in the US and western countries generally, but in non-western countries things are much worse.
Out of 203 countries, 36% receive an F grade. Another 23% receive D- to D+
Only 13% of countries receive A- or above, and another 15% B- to B+
The US ranks 40th with a B grade, and the UK ranks 15th with A-
This puts the US average on worse terms than Mexico, Ukraine and Uruguay, to name a few examples. They're all making much faster progress. And in some US states the level of discrimination is much greater than in others.
I would expect Austria to discriminate against transgender people more than the US does. The opposite is the case: we're two grades above. How is it possible that so many countries that during the 90s would've perhaps looked more conservative than the US are now looking more progressive? The answer is simple: the Republican party is supporting a culture of discrimination and they're constantly blocking pro-LGBTQ legislation. Although plasmidghost is of the opinion that the Democratic party may only be marginally better in that regard.
And the thing is: the people generally are very much in favor of the whole of LGBTQ. This is true in most countries that discriminate against them less than the global average. In the US it's the fringe right that blocks their rights and culture and downplays their suffering. And the remaining conservatives just go along with it.
https://www.asherfergusson.com/global-trans-rights-index/
|
On July 02 2023 17:05 Magic Powers wrote:And this comment in particular demonstrates BJ's (very frequent) self-victimization on this message board. Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 12:46 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 10:10 NewSunshine wrote:On July 02 2023 07:01 ChristianS wrote:On July 02 2023 06:31 BlackJack wrote:
Whether or not you feel like what you’re experiencing is the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2 doesn’t make it objectively true. If pointing out absurdist statements as having “no basis in reality” counts as vitriol then I’m guilty as charged. If you want to vent about your lived experience of being persecuted that’s for the Blogs section. If you want to make bold statements like conservatives are celebrating Nazis that beat trans people or the US is a police state in the Politics thread you should expect people to disagree. Plasmids response to Drone is far more of a non sequitur than my post to Plasmid. Did I miss “the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2” or are you making that up? There’s plenty in plasmid’s post I’m not convinced is true, that’s not what I’m calling vitriolic. It’s shit like “the last time you posted here” and then dragging out an old argument you had – an argument in which, if I remember correctly, you demanded evidence of a claim or else you thought mod action was needed. I thought you were coming on too strong then, and said so; I definitely think you’re coming on too strong now. If you still want evidence, by the way, here, I googled it and found a study. I won’t pretend I have the skills to evaluate that study critically – crime statistics are absolutely not my area – but I will say what I’ve heard from a couple trans friends is that random hostility from strangers is not uncommon, it’s getting worse, and the way they talk is increasingly dehumanizing. And that’s in places like CA, Seattle, or Portland. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be trans in the middle of Idaho or Florida or West Virginia. In a vacuum, it's fine to say that in a discussion forum people should expect some level of rigor. In practice, you end up coming across like a dick when you appoint yourself as gatekeeper of factual debate, forbid any emotions from anyone participating in the discussion, and demand research receipts for everything. Among other things, this is what got people irritated to hell and back with Danglars, now banned. He burned all the good will in any discussion because people were instantly wrong to have any strong feelings on a subject, and being wrong, they needed to be condescended to and patronized accordingly. Here we have an actual trans woman relaying her experiences in the US, which were so bad she had to leave the country, and describing how she feels regarding LGBTQ+ developments in the US. If you're interested in understanding people with differing viewpoints to yourself, this is the part where you shut up and listen, and give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they know the first thing they're talking about. Blackjack instead jumped on it as an opportunity to question the validity of her feelings, and argue that she can't possibly be justified in feeling the way she feels because it isn't backed up by data that he likes. Way to make her point there, my dude. Calling the US a police state and saying the conservative base is cheering on Nazis assaulting trans people is not “relaying a personal experience.” If you want to relay a personal experience and be free of criticism it can be done in Blogs. If you want to say scurrilous things about a group of people or a country in the Politics thread people have a right to question it. It’s one or the other. To be fair plasmid isn’t even the one using their identify to deflect criticism of their claims, that’s what other people are doing for them. This is everything that’s wrong with political discourse in this country. People in this thread thinking it’s fine and dandy to attack conservatives as Nazi-loving transphobes and then use identity politics to shut down any disagreement. No one here is making the argument that, because someone is a transgender person, they should not face criticism. Absolutely no one. This claim of BJ is completely false and unsubstantiated, and it can only be a result of BJ engaging in bad faith interpretation of people's comments. plasmidghost has presented actual evidence for their claims, which BJ is completely ignoring. He has never addressed any of it and he keeps circling the evidence in favor of his accusation against plasmid. When the evidence is presented, BJ does - contrary to what would be expected from actual good faith argumentation - not address it honestly and incorporate it into the argument at large, but instead paints himself as the victim of identity politics gone awry. Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation. This is wholly being done in bad faith. I can't possibly consider this a genuine form of argumentation. BJ is not a victim in this board, yet portrays himself as such over and over again. Which I find especially bizarre this time considering the person he's criticizing is a real victim of real perpetration.
And to also reiterate this fact: gay people, queer people, trans people aren't the ones making their own existence political. They're just trying to figure out who they are and live their lives and mind their business, it's been Republicans consistently showing they're the ones obsessed with identity politics, forcing out anti-LGBTQ legislation even though, as has been pointed out, a simple majority of people either have no problems with them or approve of them. The Right is obsessed with what's in their pants and who they love and how they dress. The identity politics originates from one very clear place.
|
On July 01 2023 15:08 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2023 10:29 plasmidghost wrote:On July 01 2023 01:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:On July 01 2023 01:11 Kyadytim wrote:For me, the most upsetting part of the Creative LLC case is that the request that triggered the lawsuit seems to be fake. The person who allegedly sent it claims to not have sent it, and also has been happily married in a heterosexual relationship for 15 years. It was also sent the day after the case was filed. This case existed entirely so that conservative litigation teams could give the Supreme Court an opportunity to rule in favor of legal discrimination. www.theguardian.com That might be upsetting in terms of how you view the court, but it could also be encouraging in terms of what impact it'll have. If they had to make up a case it prolly won't be difficult to find a web designer, even for gay couples. I'm guessing today, this is a case where being publicly known for refusing to provide services for gay weddings will cost you more than you gain. Not saying it's not problematic but I'm pretty confident gay acceptance isn't contingent on legislation. I can also accept the argument that a website is more related to free speech than other services are (even if this is disingenuous from the people making that claim), and thus I dunno if this creates a precedent for other services. Maybe it does but I dunno. This post is super emblematic of why I don't post on this site anymore. You and many others have no fucking clue how bad this ruling is for queer people and how bad things are for us or y'all simply don't care and I've come to realize that there is no amount of evidence or experience I can show that will make y'all or other people change their minds. People are jumping at the opportunity to attack queer people throughout the US. Nazis are actively assaulting queer people and being celebrated for it by the conservative base. The Civil Rights Act is dead and the Democrats and Biden will not do anything to fix the SC, they'll just send out links to ActBlue. The US is a decaying police state with no revolutionary potential and will not get better, and I've given up hope in general for most everywhere else, so fuck it, I'll just post this and leave for good: [img]https://images2.imgbox.com/54/51/uegyih58_o.jpg[/im] I think the last time you posted here you were saying that trans kids were being removed from homes with loving parents to be put into foster homes. When I asked you for a single example you couldn’t provide one and told me that’s what people on Twitter who you trusted were telling you. A few months ago it was front page news everywherewhen a woman at the cheesecake factory that probably had one too many Skinnylicious margaritas said some nasty things to an LGBT person. The idea that there’s some epidemic of nazis beating up queer people while the conservatives cheer them on sounds a little far fetched. Why is it not all over the news? If saying nasty things is front page news worthy than these assaults should be even more newsworthy and if they are as prevalent as you make it seem we should hear about it. Are they just not getting captured on some of the 300 million smartphones? You’ve been posting for years now constantly invoking genocide and nazism and hitler. It’s absurd. The LGBTQ population is exploding. 20% of gen Z identifies as LGBTQ. That’s 1 in 5. That’s double the rate of millennials and millennials are double the rate of Gen X and Gen X is double the rate of baby boomers. Either your posts have no basis in reality or this is the worst attempt at genocide in history.
This kind of language seems to have become quite common. I saw a manifestation against restrictions on sex altering surgery where many of the protesters called it "genocide" and here is a male transgender cyclist calling restrictions on her participation in tournaments "genocide".
I'm not denying that there are many legitimate problems to discuss, but throwing around words like that seems to have become a trend.
|
People aren't saying the current state of the US is literally Nazi Germany, they're drawing parallels and making connections to history. Auschwitz didn't pop up over night, concentration camps and the 6M death toll didn't happen overnight. It took years of propaganda and rhetoric and normalizing violence against an increasingly othered group. It's the "and then they came for me" quote. If you play around on a slippery slope, you find yourself at the bottom real fast. People are making the connection and saying if we don't stand against the Right now then things are going to look really grim for LGBTQ people really fast.
|
On July 02 2023 21:06 NewSunshine wrote:
People aren't saying the current state of the US is literally Nazi Germany, they're drawing parallels and making connections to history. Auschwitz didn't pop up over night, concentration camps and the 6M death toll didn't happen overnight. It took years of propaganda and rhetoric and normalizing violence against an increasingly othered group. It's the "and then they came for me" quote. If you play around on a slippery slope, you find yourself at the bottom real fast. People are making the connection and saying if we don't stand against the Right now then things are going to look really grim for LGBTQ people really fast.
It's even more poignant when we remember that the quote starts with socialists. It's the easiest group to join instead of being part of the (bipartisan) group undermining and oppressing them.
My quote is a reference to how people love to think about what they'd have done in situations like the rise of Nazism, but the reality is they'd have likely been, as they are now, instrumental in laying the groundwork through their (and their representatives) opposition to socialism/ists.
|
On July 02 2023 20:55 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2023 15:08 BlackJack wrote:On July 01 2023 10:29 plasmidghost wrote:On July 01 2023 01:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:On July 01 2023 01:11 Kyadytim wrote:For me, the most upsetting part of the Creative LLC case is that the request that triggered the lawsuit seems to be fake. The person who allegedly sent it claims to not have sent it, and also has been happily married in a heterosexual relationship for 15 years. It was also sent the day after the case was filed. This case existed entirely so that conservative litigation teams could give the Supreme Court an opportunity to rule in favor of legal discrimination. www.theguardian.com That might be upsetting in terms of how you view the court, but it could also be encouraging in terms of what impact it'll have. If they had to make up a case it prolly won't be difficult to find a web designer, even for gay couples. I'm guessing today, this is a case where being publicly known for refusing to provide services for gay weddings will cost you more than you gain. Not saying it's not problematic but I'm pretty confident gay acceptance isn't contingent on legislation. I can also accept the argument that a website is more related to free speech than other services are (even if this is disingenuous from the people making that claim), and thus I dunno if this creates a precedent for other services. Maybe it does but I dunno. This post is super emblematic of why I don't post on this site anymore. You and many others have no fucking clue how bad this ruling is for queer people and how bad things are for us or y'all simply don't care and I've come to realize that there is no amount of evidence or experience I can show that will make y'all or other people change their minds. People are jumping at the opportunity to attack queer people throughout the US. Nazis are actively assaulting queer people and being celebrated for it by the conservative base. The Civil Rights Act is dead and the Democrats and Biden will not do anything to fix the SC, they'll just send out links to ActBlue. The US is a decaying police state with no revolutionary potential and will not get better, and I've given up hope in general for most everywhere else, so fuck it, I'll just post this and leave for good: [img]https://images2.imgbox.com/54/51/uegyih58_o.jpg[/im] I think the last time you posted here you were saying that trans kids were being removed from homes with loving parents to be put into foster homes. When I asked you for a single example you couldn’t provide one and told me that’s what people on Twitter who you trusted were telling you. A few months ago it was front page news everywherewhen a woman at the cheesecake factory that probably had one too many Skinnylicious margaritas said some nasty things to an LGBT person. The idea that there’s some epidemic of nazis beating up queer people while the conservatives cheer them on sounds a little far fetched. Why is it not all over the news? If saying nasty things is front page news worthy than these assaults should be even more newsworthy and if they are as prevalent as you make it seem we should hear about it. Are they just not getting captured on some of the 300 million smartphones? You’ve been posting for years now constantly invoking genocide and nazism and hitler. It’s absurd. The LGBTQ population is exploding. 20% of gen Z identifies as LGBTQ. That’s 1 in 5. That’s double the rate of millennials and millennials are double the rate of Gen X and Gen X is double the rate of baby boomers. Either your posts have no basis in reality or this is the worst attempt at genocide in history. This kind of language seems to have become quite common. I saw a manifestation against restrictions on sex altering surgery where many of the protesters called it "genocide" and here is a male transgender cyclist calling restrictions on her participation in tournaments "genocide". I'm not denying that there are many legitimate problems to discuss, but throwing around words like that seems to have become a trend.
Regarding MTF athletes, for every person who calls their exclusion "genocide" you have a number of (not right-wing) people arguing over the nuances of inclusion vs fairness vs science. Yes, they're having a debate.
For people who are politically neutral or left-leaning, they're unsure of what to do and they're having a conversation. For people who are politically right-wing, there is no debate. All of them are completely certain of what to do: strict exclusion of all MTF athletes. The whole of the right-wing is ideologically driven, but only the fringe left is ideologically driven, while the overwhelming majority of remaining people between these two groups is thinking about the dilemma fairly rationally.
The distinction is clear: left-wingers are not generally being radical about MTF athlete inclusion. They're debating the issue. They're not just winging it and blindly following the personal interests of a small fraction of the population.
We certainly can't say the same thing about many right-wingers. They're just blocking the path and they're never going to budge. It's like arguing with a wall.
And this is regarding a tiny issue in the vastness of the transgender landscape. MTF athletes are a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the population.
"Would transgender women 'take over' women's sport?
Harper: Trans women are never going to take over women's sport. First of all, trans people make up roughly 1% of the population.
The best example of a population study to look at comes from America. If you look at NCAA sports, there are more than 200,000 women competing every year in NCAA sports. Trans women make up 0.5-1% of the population so we should be seeing 1,000-2,000 trans women every year.
The NCAA 11 years ago allowed trans women to compete, based on hormone therapy. We should be seeing 1,000-2,000. We see a handful every year."
Somehow an issue that affects very few people in the world is front and center for conservatives regarding their issues with transgender people. How? Why? Is this really such a big deal that it has to result in anti-LGBTQ legislation? The answer is obviously no. The sports associations can figure this out for themselves, they don't need laws interfering with the process. Mistakes will be made on the way to a better solution, but these are not going to "ruin women's sports" in any meaningful capacity.
So yet again conservatives (pretend to) care more about a much smaller fraction of the population than about a much larger fraction. This is called a "red herring fallacy".
https://www.bbc.com/sport/61346517
|
On July 02 2023 19:43 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 19:05 Uldridge wrote:
You could add "in the West", but then why have the US politics thread anymore for that implication? Indeed I could've added that for further clarification. I'm not sure if that would've made my argument stronger or if it's perhaps even irrelevant. Transgender people are among the most discriminated groups in the US and western countries generally, but in non-western countries things are much worse. Out of 203 countries, 36% receive an F grade. Another 23% receive D- to D+ Only 13% of countries receive A- or above, and another 15% B- to B+ The US ranks 40th with a B grade, and the UK ranks 15th with A- This puts the US average on worse terms than Mexico, Ukraine and Uruguay, to name a few examples. They're all making much faster progress. And in some US states the level of discrimination is much greater than in others. I would expect Austria to discriminate against transgender people more than the US does. The opposite is the case: we're two grades above. How is it possible that so many countries that during the 90s would've perhaps looked more conservative than the US are now looking more progressive? The answer is simple: the Republican party is supporting a culture of discrimination and they're constantly blocking pro-LGBTQ legislation. Although plasmidghost is of the opinion that the Democratic party may only be marginally better in that regard. And the thing is: the people generally are very much in favor of the whole of LGBTQ. This is true in most countries that discriminate against them less than the global average. In the US it's the fringe right that blocks their rights and culture and downplays their suffering. And the remaining conservatives just go along with it. https://www.asherfergusson.com/global-trans-rights-index/
Qualifying your argument to make it a weaker claim does (should) make it easier to defend, but not unassailable.
Imagine we agree that Birdemic is the worst movie ever. Then you watch the Godfather Part 3 and want to express how bad it is, but you know you can't call it the worst movie ever because it's objectively not as bad as Birdemic.
But we also happen to agree Rem Lezar and The Room are some of the worst movies ever. So you tone down your claim to the Godfather Part 3 being one of the worst movies ever. That doesn't make it automatically accepted. You still have to show it's on par with Rem Lezar and The Room if you want to convince someone it's actually true, and that it's not just your off-the-cuff reaction to the movie.
You have stated that transgenders are one of the most discriminated against groups in the US and Western countries, then linked us to a list with a bunch of those countries getting Bs and As and being at the top of the list for best places for transgender. This suggests by your own metric that the US and Western countries discriminate very little against anyone at all.
You can say some US states are worse than others, but then it's dishonest not to admit some are better than others. That's what averages are. For literally anything you're trying to analyze, be it transgender discrimination or murder rates or cost of living or number of swimming pools.
The subjective list has its own issues as I'm not sure Mexico and Ukraine and South Africa are preferable to the US when it comes to transgenders or indeed basically anyone. Also, Malta is at the top because 16 year olds can change their legal gender without parental consent. That comes with its own issues.
This leads to a difficult conversation which is that just because you can frame something as a "right" it doesn't mean society or especially the law should acknowledge that framing. Having internet is better than not, so should there be a "right" to internet - or a car - or free public transportation - or the ability to kill people you don't like, which sounds the right to bear arms, which is one real legal right certain people do specifically want to curtail. We don't have the right not to pay taxes. That's not a civil rights problem.
On July 02 2023 22:15 Magic Powers wrote:
Regarding MTF athletes, for every person who calls their exclusion "genocide" you have a number of (not right-wing) people arguing over the nuances of inclusion vs fairness vs science. Yes, they're having a debate.
For people who are politically neutral or left-leaning, they're unsure of what to do and they're having a conversation. For people who are politically right-wing, there is no debate. All of them are completely certain of what to do: strict exclusion of all MTF athletes. The whole of the right-wing is ideologically driven, but only the fringe left is ideologically driven, while the overwhelming majority of remaining people between these two groups is thinking about the dilemma fairly rationally.
The distinction is clear: left-wingers are not generally being radical about MTF athlete inclusion. They're debating the issue. They're not just winging it and blindly following the personal interests of a small fraction of the population.
We certainly can't say the same thing about many right-wingers. They're just blocking the path and they're never going to budge. It's like arguing with a wall.
Assuming for the sake of argument that were true, that shouldn't affect your own or your overwhelming majority of rational politically neutral and left-leaning people's decision-making. The most stubborn people could believe something to be true, that's not an argument to dismiss the proposition. Their idea would also have a chance of being right.
On July 02 2023 22:15 Magic Powers wrote:
And this is regarding a tiny issue in the vastness of the transgender landscape. MTF athletes are a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the population.
"Would transgender women 'take over' women's sport?
Harper: Trans women are never going to take over women's sport. First of all, trans people make up roughly 1% of the population.
The best example of a population study to look at comes from America. If you look at NCAA sports, there are more than 200,000 women competing every year in NCAA sports. Trans women make up 0.5-1% of the population so we should be seeing 1,000-2,000 trans women every year.
The NCAA 11 years ago allowed trans women to compete, based on hormone therapy. We should be seeing 1,000-2,000. We see a handful every year."
This is not your argument but since you posted it here verbatim I will nitpick why it's drawing vast conclusions from half-vast data: First, it's assumed rather than demonstrated that since trans are roughly 1% of the population that they're also 1% of the college population - this number could go up or down, it's a basic fallacy of division.
In addition, it (the reasoning) seems to suppose all trans are trans women, completely disregarding trans men - this is a really obvious mistake to miss. And you would admit even the stubbornest conservative wouldn't expect trans men to have any competitive advantage in anything except perhaps gymnastics and ultramarathon swimming. Right?
Lastly, it assumes again without evidence, and simply by radical quota-ism, that trans women college students want to be athletes at the same rate as the population and any deviation from that is a systematic oppression waiting to be overcome, and not the result of other hidden variables and mechanisms.
My Google said 36 trans athletes that we publicly know about have competed it NCAA sports. 3 won national championships. 8%. Without knowing the standard deviation, anyway we can just ballpark if there were 1000 trans athletes competing, 80 of them, plus or minus, would be champions. Or your upper bound, 2000, there would be 160 champions. That doesn't seem insignificant to the women who would speak about being displaced from their own spaces.
On July 02 2023 22:15 Magic Powers wrote:
Somehow an issue that affects very few people in the world is front and center for conservatives regarding their issues with transgender people. How? Why? Is this really such a big deal that it has to result in anti-LGBTQ legislation? The answer is obviously no. The sports associations can figure this out for themselves, they don't need laws interfering with the process. Mistakes will be made on the way to a better solution, but these are not going to "ruin women's sports" in any meaningful capacity.
So yet again conservatives (pretend to) care more about a much smaller fraction of the population than about a much larger fraction. This is called a "red herring fallacy".
Women are not a small fraction of the population.
|
On July 02 2023 23:31 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 19:43 Magic Powers wrote:On July 02 2023 19:05 Uldridge wrote:
You could add "in the West", but then why have the US politics thread anymore for that implication? Indeed I could've added that for further clarification. I'm not sure if that would've made my argument stronger or if it's perhaps even irrelevant. Transgender people are among the most discriminated groups in the US and western countries generally, but in non-western countries things are much worse. Out of 203 countries, 36% receive an F grade. Another 23% receive D- to D+ Only 13% of countries receive A- or above, and another 15% B- to B+ The US ranks 40th with a B grade, and the UK ranks 15th with A- This puts the US average on worse terms than Mexico, Ukraine and Uruguay, to name a few examples. They're all making much faster progress. And in some US states the level of discrimination is much greater than in others. I would expect Austria to discriminate against transgender people more than the US does. The opposite is the case: we're two grades above. How is it possible that so many countries that during the 90s would've perhaps looked more conservative than the US are now looking more progressive? The answer is simple: the Republican party is supporting a culture of discrimination and they're constantly blocking pro-LGBTQ legislation. Although plasmidghost is of the opinion that the Democratic party may only be marginally better in that regard. And the thing is: the people generally are very much in favor of the whole of LGBTQ. This is true in most countries that discriminate against them less than the global average. In the US it's the fringe right that blocks their rights and culture and downplays their suffering. And the remaining conservatives just go along with it. https://www.asherfergusson.com/global-trans-rights-index/ Qualifying your argument to make it a weaker claim does (should) make it easier to defend, but not unassailable. Imagine we agree that Birdemic is the worst movie ever. Then you watch the Godfather Part 3 and want to express how bad it is, but you know you can't call it the worst movie ever because it's objectively not as bad as Birdemic. But we also happen to agree Rem Lezar and The Room are some of the worst movies ever. So you tone down your claim to the Godfather Part 3 being one of the worst movies ever. That doesn't make it automatically accepted. You still have to show it's on par with Rem Lezar and The Room if you want to convince someone it's actually true, and that it's not just your off-the-cuff reaction to the movie. You have stated that transgenders are one of the most discriminated against groups in the US and Western countries, then linked us to a list with a bunch of those countries getting Bs and As and being at the top of the list for best places for transgender. This suggests by your own metric that the US and Western countries discriminate very little against anyone at all. You can say some US states are worse than others, but then it's dishonest not to admit some are better than others. That's what averages are. For literally anything you're trying to analyze, be it transgender discrimination or murder rates or cost of living or number of swimming pools. The subjective list has its own issues as I'm not sure Mexico and Ukraine and South Africa are preferable to the US when it comes to transgenders or indeed basically anyone. Also, Malta is at the top because 16 year olds can change their legal gender without parental consent. That comes with its own issues. This leads to a difficult conversation which is that just because you can frame something as a "right" it doesn't mean society or especially the law should acknowledge that framing. Having internet is better than not, so should there be a "right" to internet - or a car - or free public transportation - or the ability to kill people you don't like, which sounds the right to bear arms, which is one real legal right certain people do specifically want to curtail. We don't have the right not to pay taxes. That's not a civil rights problem. Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 22:15 Magic Powers wrote:
Regarding MTF athletes, for every person who calls their exclusion "genocide" you have a number of (not right-wing) people arguing over the nuances of inclusion vs fairness vs science. Yes, they're having a debate.
For people who are politically neutral or left-leaning, they're unsure of what to do and they're having a conversation. For people who are politically right-wing, there is no debate. All of them are completely certain of what to do: strict exclusion of all MTF athletes. The whole of the right-wing is ideologically driven, but only the fringe left is ideologically driven, while the overwhelming majority of remaining people between these two groups is thinking about the dilemma fairly rationally.
The distinction is clear: left-wingers are not generally being radical about MTF athlete inclusion. They're debating the issue. They're not just winging it and blindly following the personal interests of a small fraction of the population.
We certainly can't say the same thing about many right-wingers. They're just blocking the path and they're never going to budge. It's like arguing with a wall. Assuming for the sake of argument that were true, that shouldn't affect your own or your overwhelming majority of rational politically neutral and left-leaning people's decision-making. The most stubborn people could believe something to be true, that's not an argument to dismiss the proposition. Their idea would also have a chance of being right. Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 22:15 Magic Powers wrote:
And this is regarding a tiny issue in the vastness of the transgender landscape. MTF athletes are a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the population.
"Would transgender women 'take over' women's sport?
Harper: Trans women are never going to take over women's sport. First of all, trans people make up roughly 1% of the population.
The best example of a population study to look at comes from America. If you look at NCAA sports, there are more than 200,000 women competing every year in NCAA sports. Trans women make up 0.5-1% of the population so we should be seeing 1,000-2,000 trans women every year.
The NCAA 11 years ago allowed trans women to compete, based on hormone therapy. We should be seeing 1,000-2,000. We see a handful every year." This is not your argument but since you posted it here verbatim I will nitpick why it's drawing vast conclusions from half-vast data: First, it's assumed rather than demonstrated that since trans are roughly 1% of the population that they're also 1% of the college population - this number could go up or down, it's a basic fallacy of division. In addition, it (the reasoning) seems to suppose all trans are trans women, completely disregarding trans men - this is a really obvious mistake to miss. And you would admit even the stubbornest conservative wouldn't expect trans men to have any competitive advantage in anything except perhaps gymnastics and ultramarathon swimming. Right? Lastly, it assumes again without evidence, and simply by radical quota-ism, that trans women college students want to be athletes at the same rate as the population and any deviation from that is a systematic oppression waiting to be overcome, and not the result of other hidden variables and mechanisms. My Google said 36 trans athletes that we publicly know about have competed it NCAA sports. 3 won national championships. 8%. Without knowing the standard deviation, anyway we can just ballpark if there were 1000 trans athletes competing, 80 of them, plus or minus, would be champions. Or your upper bound, 2000, there would be 160 champions. That doesn't seem insignificant to the women who would speak about being displaced from their own spaces. Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 22:15 Magic Powers wrote:
Somehow an issue that affects very few people in the world is front and center for conservatives regarding their issues with transgender people. How? Why? Is this really such a big deal that it has to result in anti-LGBTQ legislation? The answer is obviously no. The sports associations can figure this out for themselves, they don't need laws interfering with the process. Mistakes will be made on the way to a better solution, but these are not going to "ruin women's sports" in any meaningful capacity.
So yet again conservatives (pretend to) care more about a much smaller fraction of the population than about a much larger fraction. This is called a "red herring fallacy".
Women are not a small fraction of the population.
Women who compete against trans athletes are a small, neigh, miniscule fraction of the population. Conservatives are using this certainly-not-irrelevant-but-comparably-tiny demographic to block trans rights in general, not just the right to compete for gold medals. Demonstrably conservatives aren't protecting women, they're strictly aiming to block transgender rights irrespective of any compelling arguments.
Furthermore they're ignoring scientific evidence, meaning they want no trans athletes to compete with any women under any circumstances regardless of what the evidence says.
The fearmongering that the population of MTF athletes is suddenly going to balloon out of control and take over women's sports is also completely baseless.
Next, FTM athletes are not an issue in sports. If they compete with men, they don't have any unfair advantages. This is a pointless argument because FTM athletes, simply due to the definition of their gender, are not going to join women's sports.
And "a chance of being right"? What does that even mean? Either an argument is valid or it isn't.
The comparison of transgender liberties to access to internet or to ownership of guns is completely absurd. These are not equatable in any capacity. Transgender people want to have sole ownership of their own bodies. They do not want to control other people's lives nor do they want to access services for free that wouldn't then also be free to other people. These comparisons make no sense.
And the fact that some US states are more pro-LGBTQ is irrelevant to the fact that others are more anti-LGBTQ. It doesn't make the situation better.
When the national average of the US is 40th, then that implies some of the states would be ranked far lower than that. This is an issue that needs addressing, so the claim that "not all of the US is bad" is a distraction from the core point that the US is too much anti-LGBTQ, and that this is in very large part the fault of the Republican party.
|
On July 02 2023 17:05 Magic Powers wrote:And this comment in particular demonstrates BJ's (very frequent) self-victimization on this message board. Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 12:46 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 10:10 NewSunshine wrote:On July 02 2023 07:01 ChristianS wrote:On July 02 2023 06:31 BlackJack wrote:
Whether or not you feel like what you’re experiencing is the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2 doesn’t make it objectively true. If pointing out absurdist statements as having “no basis in reality” counts as vitriol then I’m guilty as charged. If you want to vent about your lived experience of being persecuted that’s for the Blogs section. If you want to make bold statements like conservatives are celebrating Nazis that beat trans people or the US is a police state in the Politics thread you should expect people to disagree. Plasmids response to Drone is far more of a non sequitur than my post to Plasmid. Did I miss “the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2” or are you making that up? There’s plenty in plasmid’s post I’m not convinced is true, that’s not what I’m calling vitriolic. It’s shit like “the last time you posted here” and then dragging out an old argument you had – an argument in which, if I remember correctly, you demanded evidence of a claim or else you thought mod action was needed. I thought you were coming on too strong then, and said so; I definitely think you’re coming on too strong now. If you still want evidence, by the way, here, I googled it and found a study. I won’t pretend I have the skills to evaluate that study critically – crime statistics are absolutely not my area – but I will say what I’ve heard from a couple trans friends is that random hostility from strangers is not uncommon, it’s getting worse, and the way they talk is increasingly dehumanizing. And that’s in places like CA, Seattle, or Portland. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be trans in the middle of Idaho or Florida or West Virginia. In a vacuum, it's fine to say that in a discussion forum people should expect some level of rigor. In practice, you end up coming across like a dick when you appoint yourself as gatekeeper of factual debate, forbid any emotions from anyone participating in the discussion, and demand research receipts for everything. Among other things, this is what got people irritated to hell and back with Danglars, now banned. He burned all the good will in any discussion because people were instantly wrong to have any strong feelings on a subject, and being wrong, they needed to be condescended to and patronized accordingly. Here we have an actual trans woman relaying her experiences in the US, which were so bad she had to leave the country, and describing how she feels regarding LGBTQ+ developments in the US. If you're interested in understanding people with differing viewpoints to yourself, this is the part where you shut up and listen, and give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they know the first thing they're talking about. Blackjack instead jumped on it as an opportunity to question the validity of her feelings, and argue that she can't possibly be justified in feeling the way she feels because it isn't backed up by data that he likes. Way to make her point there, my dude. Calling the US a police state and saying the conservative base is cheering on Nazis assaulting trans people is not “relaying a personal experience.” If you want to relay a personal experience and be free of criticism it can be done in Blogs. If you want to say scurrilous things about a group of people or a country in the Politics thread people have a right to question it. It’s one or the other. To be fair plasmid isn’t even the one using their identify to deflect criticism of their claims, that’s what other people are doing for them. This is everything that’s wrong with political discourse in this country. People in this thread thinking it’s fine and dandy to attack conservatives as Nazi-loving transphobes and then use identity politics to shut down any disagreement. No one here is making the argument that, because someone is a transgender person, they should not face criticism. Absolutely no one. This claim of BJ is completely false and unsubstantiated, and it can only be a result of BJ engaging in bad faith interpretation of people's comments. plasmidghost has presented actual evidence for their claims, which BJ is completely ignoring. He has never addressed any of it and he keeps circling the evidence in favor of his accusation against plasmid. When the evidence is presented, BJ does - contrary to what would be expected from actual good faith argumentation - not address it honestly and incorporate it into the argument at large, but instead paints himself as the victim of identity politics gone awry. Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation. This is wholly being done in bad faith. I can't possibly consider this a genuine form of argumentation. BJ is not a victim in this board, yet portrays himself as such over and over again. Which I find especially bizarre this time considering the person he's criticizing is a real victim of real perpetration.
“Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation.”
First of all, that’s a complete falsehood. I specifically said in my last post that PG is not the one using their identity to deflect criticism and that it’s other people doing it on their behalf. In fact what I actually said was it’s incredibly patronizing to PG to defend them with this “omg how dare you” attitude as if PG is too fragile to have their claims challenged on a politics forum.
Second, I never said trans people don’t face any persecution. I said it’s simply not the case that they are being beaten in the street by Nazis that are celebrated by the conservative base. That it’s hyperbole and inaccurate to pretend like it’s only a matter of time before they are sent to concentration camps. Neo-Nazis protesting a drag Queen story hour does not substantiate those claims. Drag queens are not even the same thing as transgendered people by the way. Obviously it can be very easy to muddy the water here to try to foist the position of “BJ thinks trans people don’t face any discrimination” on me. It’s obviously not something I’m arguing.
Third, maybe you’ve completely missed the trend here so let me tie this in for you. A poll showed that over half of very liberal people believed the police kill over 1,000 unarmed black people per year. The real number is about 10. Another poll showed that 41% of Democrats estimated your chance of being hospitalized if you caught COVID was 50% or greater. The actual chance was 1%. So to me it’s obvious that Democrats/Liberals overestimate the perceived threats of things and not just by a little bit but by a factor of 50 or 100. You can’t solve problems if you can’t even accurately grasp the magnitude of the problem.
San Francisco, probably the most liberal city, considered these problems more grave than other cities and adopted policies that reflected that. Now they have an understaffed police department, countless businesses have closed their doors and the entirely city is spiraling into a shit sandwich in no time quick.
I’m always met with the same hostility when I point out the irrationality of how liberals overestimate any of these things.
“How dare you belittle PG’s life experience, he fled the country to escape persecution!”
“How dare you downplay COVID, my grandmother died of COVID!”
“How dare you imply black people don’t face discrimination from police, Black Lives Matter!”
Emotional arguments that people think ought to trump objective reality. Good faith argumentation, no doubt.
|
I like how you complain about people overreacting and overestimating things then proceed to claim how the entire city of San Francisco is spiraling into a shit sandwich -- because that is totally not an exaggeration but rather an objective, fact-based claim?
Seriously wish people would just stop engaging with you. It's clear as day that you simply aren't interested in having discussions or ever consider anyone else's opinions, you're only interested in 'winning' and it's tedious watching you strawman the shit out of every post all the time and every conversation devolving into a shouting matches and nitpicking at quotes for dozens of pages. Take your rant about democrats who believe 50% of COVID cases end in hospitalization -- literally who cares? None of the posters here have ever claimed anything like that, it's an irrelevant point that has nothing to do with the conversation people are trying to have yet you somehow think that makes your inane bullshit more valid. It's ridiculous.
|
On July 03 2023 01:00 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2023 17:05 Magic Powers wrote:And this comment in particular demonstrates BJ's (very frequent) self-victimization on this message board. On July 02 2023 12:46 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 10:10 NewSunshine wrote:On July 02 2023 07:01 ChristianS wrote:On July 02 2023 06:31 BlackJack wrote:
Whether or not you feel like what you’re experiencing is the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2 doesn’t make it objectively true. If pointing out absurdist statements as having “no basis in reality” counts as vitriol then I’m guilty as charged. If you want to vent about your lived experience of being persecuted that’s for the Blogs section. If you want to make bold statements like conservatives are celebrating Nazis that beat trans people or the US is a police state in the Politics thread you should expect people to disagree. Plasmids response to Drone is far more of a non sequitur than my post to Plasmid. Did I miss “the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2” or are you making that up? There’s plenty in plasmid’s post I’m not convinced is true, that’s not what I’m calling vitriolic. It’s shit like “the last time you posted here” and then dragging out an old argument you had – an argument in which, if I remember correctly, you demanded evidence of a claim or else you thought mod action was needed. I thought you were coming on too strong then, and said so; I definitely think you’re coming on too strong now. If you still want evidence, by the way, here, I googled it and found a study. I won’t pretend I have the skills to evaluate that study critically – crime statistics are absolutely not my area – but I will say what I’ve heard from a couple trans friends is that random hostility from strangers is not uncommon, it’s getting worse, and the way they talk is increasingly dehumanizing. And that’s in places like CA, Seattle, or Portland. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be trans in the middle of Idaho or Florida or West Virginia. In a vacuum, it's fine to say that in a discussion forum people should expect some level of rigor. In practice, you end up coming across like a dick when you appoint yourself as gatekeeper of factual debate, forbid any emotions from anyone participating in the discussion, and demand research receipts for everything. Among other things, this is what got people irritated to hell and back with Danglars, now banned. He burned all the good will in any discussion because people were instantly wrong to have any strong feelings on a subject, and being wrong, they needed to be condescended to and patronized accordingly. Here we have an actual trans woman relaying her experiences in the US, which were so bad she had to leave the country, and describing how she feels regarding LGBTQ+ developments in the US. If you're interested in understanding people with differing viewpoints to yourself, this is the part where you shut up and listen, and give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they know the first thing they're talking about. Blackjack instead jumped on it as an opportunity to question the validity of her feelings, and argue that she can't possibly be justified in feeling the way she feels because it isn't backed up by data that he likes. Way to make her point there, my dude. Calling the US a police state and saying the conservative base is cheering on Nazis assaulting trans people is not “relaying a personal experience.” If you want to relay a personal experience and be free of criticism it can be done in Blogs. If you want to say scurrilous things about a group of people or a country in the Politics thread people have a right to question it. It’s one or the other. To be fair plasmid isn’t even the one using their identify to deflect criticism of their claims, that’s what other people are doing for them. This is everything that’s wrong with political discourse in this country. People in this thread thinking it’s fine and dandy to attack conservatives as Nazi-loving transphobes and then use identity politics to shut down any disagreement. No one here is making the argument that, because someone is a transgender person, they should not face criticism. Absolutely no one. This claim of BJ is completely false and unsubstantiated, and it can only be a result of BJ engaging in bad faith interpretation of people's comments. plasmidghost has presented actual evidence for their claims, which BJ is completely ignoring. He has never addressed any of it and he keeps circling the evidence in favor of his accusation against plasmid. When the evidence is presented, BJ does - contrary to what would be expected from actual good faith argumentation - not address it honestly and incorporate it into the argument at large, but instead paints himself as the victim of identity politics gone awry. Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation. This is wholly being done in bad faith. I can't possibly consider this a genuine form of argumentation. BJ is not a victim in this board, yet portrays himself as such over and over again. Which I find especially bizarre this time considering the person he's criticizing is a real victim of real perpetration. “Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation.” First of all, that’s a complete falsehood. I specifically said in my last post that PG is not the one using their identity to deflect criticism and that it’s other people doing it on their behalf. In fact what I actually said was it’s incredibly patronizing to PG to defend them with this “omg how dare you” attitude as if PG is too fragile to have their claims challenged on a politics forum. Second, I never said trans people don’t face any persecution. I said it’s simply not the case that they are being beaten in the street by Nazis that are celebrated by the conservative base. That it’s hyperbole and inaccurate to pretend like it’s only a matter of time before they are sent to concentration camps. Neo-Nazis protesting a drag Queen story hour does not substantiate those claims. Drag queens are not even the same thing as transgendered people by the way. Obviously it can be very easy to muddy the water here to try to foist the position of “BJ thinks trans people don’t face any discrimination” on me. It’s obviously not something I’m arguing. Third, maybe you’ve completely missed the trend here so let me tie this in for you. A poll showed that over half of very liberal people believed the police kill over 1,000 unarmed black people per year. The real number is about 10. Another poll showed that 41% of Democrats estimated your chance of being hospitalized if you caught COVID was 50% or greater. The actual chance was 1%. So to me it’s obvious that Democrats/Liberals overestimate the perceived threats of things and not just by a little bit but by a factor of 50 or 100. You can’t solve problems if you can’t even accurately grasp the magnitude of the problem. San Francisco, probably the most liberal city, considered these problems more grave than other cities and adopted policies that reflected that. Now they have an understaffed police department, countless businesses have closed their doors and the entirely city is spiraling into a shit sandwich in no time quick. I’m always met with the same hostility when I point out the irrationality of how liberals overestimate any of these things. “How dare you belittle PG’s life experience, he fled the country to escape persecution!” “How dare you downplay COVID, my grandmother died of COVID!” “How dare you imply black people don’t face discrimination from police, Black Lives Matter!” Emotional arguments that people think ought to trump objective reality. Good faith argumentation, no doubt.
Speaking for myself, my intention when I do respond to you is never that it makes me feel good. I hate reading and responding to your comments, that's why I'm usually shortening my responses to you as much as possible while only getting my main message across. Your argumentation regarding LGBTQ issues is just bad, I haven't seen a single comment from you on that matter that I can mostly agree with. For some reason you think this is our problem. The people disagreeing with you are somehow the problem. I have a very hard time understanding your thought process that leads you to a conclusion like the one of people wanting to protect poor transgender people's feelings. No, your argumentation is bad. It's really, really bad. That's why we're arguing with you.
But it's pissing me off and it's stealing my time and energy, so with each occasion that this happens I'm less and less inclined to put quality effort into it. This is also why plasmidghost is leaving. You're completely insufferable in this regard.
|
On July 03 2023 01:22 Salazarz wrote:
I like how you complain about people overreacting and overestimating things then proceed to claim how the entire city of San Francisco is spiraling into a shit sandwich -- because that is totally not an exaggeration but rather an objective, fact-based claim?
Seriously wish people would just stop engaging with you. It's clear as day that you simply aren't interested in having discussions or ever consider anyone else's opinions, you're only interested in 'winning' and it's tedious watching you strawman the shit out of every post all the time and every conversation devolving into a shouting matches and nitpicking at quotes for dozens of pages. Take your rant about democrats who believe 50% of COVID cases end in hospitalization -- literally who cares? None of the posters here have ever claimed anything like that, it's an irrelevant point that has nothing to do with the conversation people are trying to have yet you somehow think that makes your inane bullshit more valid. It's ridiculous.
My assumption is that BJ is referring to the significant increase in robberies in San Francisco. Otherwise crime levels are more as expected.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/23/us/smash-and-grab-thefts-explainer-cec/index.html
What this has to do with absolutely anything, I... just have no idea. I don't understand BJ's thought processes. He invents a strawman, argues against the strawman, comes out victorious, celebrates. I can only watch in bewilderment.
|
Northern Ireland23717 Posts
There’s a not inconsiderable overlap between folks who will drop comments disparaging women’s sport and those that want legislative action to preserve the integrity of said same thing from trans folks.
A purely anecdotal observation of course.
But forgive me being somewhat cynical about motivations
|
On July 03 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2023 01:00 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 17:05 Magic Powers wrote:And this comment in particular demonstrates BJ's (very frequent) self-victimization on this message board. On July 02 2023 12:46 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 10:10 NewSunshine wrote:On July 02 2023 07:01 ChristianS wrote:On July 02 2023 06:31 BlackJack wrote:
Whether or not you feel like what you’re experiencing is the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2 doesn’t make it objectively true. If pointing out absurdist statements as having “no basis in reality” counts as vitriol then I’m guilty as charged. If you want to vent about your lived experience of being persecuted that’s for the Blogs section. If you want to make bold statements like conservatives are celebrating Nazis that beat trans people or the US is a police state in the Politics thread you should expect people to disagree. Plasmids response to Drone is far more of a non sequitur than my post to Plasmid. Did I miss “the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2” or are you making that up? There’s plenty in plasmid’s post I’m not convinced is true, that’s not what I’m calling vitriolic. It’s shit like “the last time you posted here” and then dragging out an old argument you had – an argument in which, if I remember correctly, you demanded evidence of a claim or else you thought mod action was needed. I thought you were coming on too strong then, and said so; I definitely think you’re coming on too strong now. If you still want evidence, by the way, here, I googled it and found a study. I won’t pretend I have the skills to evaluate that study critically – crime statistics are absolutely not my area – but I will say what I’ve heard from a couple trans friends is that random hostility from strangers is not uncommon, it’s getting worse, and the way they talk is increasingly dehumanizing. And that’s in places like CA, Seattle, or Portland. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be trans in the middle of Idaho or Florida or West Virginia. In a vacuum, it's fine to say that in a discussion forum people should expect some level of rigor. In practice, you end up coming across like a dick when you appoint yourself as gatekeeper of factual debate, forbid any emotions from anyone participating in the discussion, and demand research receipts for everything. Among other things, this is what got people irritated to hell and back with Danglars, now banned. He burned all the good will in any discussion because people were instantly wrong to have any strong feelings on a subject, and being wrong, they needed to be condescended to and patronized accordingly. Here we have an actual trans woman relaying her experiences in the US, which were so bad she had to leave the country, and describing how she feels regarding LGBTQ+ developments in the US. If you're interested in understanding people with differing viewpoints to yourself, this is the part where you shut up and listen, and give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they know the first thing they're talking about. Blackjack instead jumped on it as an opportunity to question the validity of her feelings, and argue that she can't possibly be justified in feeling the way she feels because it isn't backed up by data that he likes. Way to make her point there, my dude. Calling the US a police state and saying the conservative base is cheering on Nazis assaulting trans people is not “relaying a personal experience.” If you want to relay a personal experience and be free of criticism it can be done in Blogs. If you want to say scurrilous things about a group of people or a country in the Politics thread people have a right to question it. It’s one or the other. To be fair plasmid isn’t even the one using their identify to deflect criticism of their claims, that’s what other people are doing for them. This is everything that’s wrong with political discourse in this country. People in this thread thinking it’s fine and dandy to attack conservatives as Nazi-loving transphobes and then use identity politics to shut down any disagreement. No one here is making the argument that, because someone is a transgender person, they should not face criticism. Absolutely no one. This claim of BJ is completely false and unsubstantiated, and it can only be a result of BJ engaging in bad faith interpretation of people's comments. plasmidghost has presented actual evidence for their claims, which BJ is completely ignoring. He has never addressed any of it and he keeps circling the evidence in favor of his accusation against plasmid. When the evidence is presented, BJ does - contrary to what would be expected from actual good faith argumentation - not address it honestly and incorporate it into the argument at large, but instead paints himself as the victim of identity politics gone awry. Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation. This is wholly being done in bad faith. I can't possibly consider this a genuine form of argumentation. BJ is not a victim in this board, yet portrays himself as such over and over again. Which I find especially bizarre this time considering the person he's criticizing is a real victim of real perpetration. “Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation.” First of all, that’s a complete falsehood. I specifically said in my last post that PG is not the one using their identity to deflect criticism and that it’s other people doing it on their behalf. In fact what I actually said was it’s incredibly patronizing to PG to defend them with this “omg how dare you” attitude as if PG is too fragile to have their claims challenged on a politics forum. Second, I never said trans people don’t face any persecution. I said it’s simply not the case that they are being beaten in the street by Nazis that are celebrated by the conservative base. That it’s hyperbole and inaccurate to pretend like it’s only a matter of time before they are sent to concentration camps. Neo-Nazis protesting a drag Queen story hour does not substantiate those claims. Drag queens are not even the same thing as transgendered people by the way. Obviously it can be very easy to muddy the water here to try to foist the position of “BJ thinks trans people don’t face any discrimination” on me. It’s obviously not something I’m arguing. Third, maybe you’ve completely missed the trend here so let me tie this in for you. A poll showed that over half of very liberal people believed the police kill over 1,000 unarmed black people per year. The real number is about 10. Another poll showed that 41% of Democrats estimated your chance of being hospitalized if you caught COVID was 50% or greater. The actual chance was 1%. So to me it’s obvious that Democrats/Liberals overestimate the perceived threats of things and not just by a little bit but by a factor of 50 or 100. You can’t solve problems if you can’t even accurately grasp the magnitude of the problem. San Francisco, probably the most liberal city, considered these problems more grave than other cities and adopted policies that reflected that. Now they have an understaffed police department, countless businesses have closed their doors and the entirely city is spiraling into a shit sandwich in no time quick. I’m always met with the same hostility when I point out the irrationality of how liberals overestimate any of these things. “How dare you belittle PG’s life experience, he fled the country to escape persecution!” “How dare you downplay COVID, my grandmother died of COVID!” “How dare you imply black people don’t face discrimination from police, Black Lives Matter!” Emotional arguments that people think ought to trump objective reality. Good faith argumentation, no doubt. Speaking for myself, my intention when I do respond to you is never that it makes me feel good. I hate reading and responding to your comments, that's why I'm usually shortening my responses to you as much as possible while only getting my main message across. Your argumentation regarding LGBTQ issues is just bad, I haven't seen a single comment from you on that matter that I can mostly agree with. For some reason you think this is our problem. The people disagreeing with you are somehow the problem. I have a very hard time understanding your thought process that leads you to a conclusion like the one of people wanting to protect poor transgender people's feelings. No, your argumentation is bad. It's really, really bad. That's why we're arguing with you. But it's pissing me off and it's stealing my time and energy, so with each occasion that this happens I'm less and less inclined to put quality effort into it. This is also why plasmidghost is leaving. You're completely insufferable in this regard.
I got it from you saying I’m “contributing to the pain of LGBTQ people” because I disagree with the notions that conservatives are celebrating Nazis that assault trans people and that there’s not a trans genocide going on.
Isn’t that what that means? I’m not causing physical pain, right? That would be impossible through the internet. So I must be causing them emotional pain. Another word for emotions is feelings. If this is another bad faith interpretation of your words then I’m sorry, maybe I just have a poor grasp of English.
|
On July 03 2023 02:13 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:On July 03 2023 01:00 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 17:05 Magic Powers wrote:And this comment in particular demonstrates BJ's (very frequent) self-victimization on this message board. On July 02 2023 12:46 BlackJack wrote:On July 02 2023 10:10 NewSunshine wrote:On July 02 2023 07:01 ChristianS wrote:On July 02 2023 06:31 BlackJack wrote:
Whether or not you feel like what you’re experiencing is the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2 doesn’t make it objectively true. If pointing out absurdist statements as having “no basis in reality” counts as vitriol then I’m guilty as charged. If you want to vent about your lived experience of being persecuted that’s for the Blogs section. If you want to make bold statements like conservatives are celebrating Nazis that beat trans people or the US is a police state in the Politics thread you should expect people to disagree. Plasmids response to Drone is far more of a non sequitur than my post to Plasmid. Did I miss “the same as what European Jews experienced in WW2” or are you making that up? There’s plenty in plasmid’s post I’m not convinced is true, that’s not what I’m calling vitriolic. It’s shit like “the last time you posted here” and then dragging out an old argument you had – an argument in which, if I remember correctly, you demanded evidence of a claim or else you thought mod action was needed. I thought you were coming on too strong then, and said so; I definitely think you’re coming on too strong now. If you still want evidence, by the way, here, I googled it and found a study. I won’t pretend I have the skills to evaluate that study critically – crime statistics are absolutely not my area – but I will say what I’ve heard from a couple trans friends is that random hostility from strangers is not uncommon, it’s getting worse, and the way they talk is increasingly dehumanizing. And that’s in places like CA, Seattle, or Portland. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be trans in the middle of Idaho or Florida or West Virginia. In a vacuum, it's fine to say that in a discussion forum people should expect some level of rigor. In practice, you end up coming across like a dick when you appoint yourself as gatekeeper of factual debate, forbid any emotions from anyone participating in the discussion, and demand research receipts for everything. Among other things, this is what got people irritated to hell and back with Danglars, now banned. He burned all the good will in any discussion because people were instantly wrong to have any strong feelings on a subject, and being wrong, they needed to be condescended to and patronized accordingly. Here we have an actual trans woman relaying her experiences in the US, which were so bad she had to leave the country, and describing how she feels regarding LGBTQ+ developments in the US. If you're interested in understanding people with differing viewpoints to yourself, this is the part where you shut up and listen, and give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they know the first thing they're talking about. Blackjack instead jumped on it as an opportunity to question the validity of her feelings, and argue that she can't possibly be justified in feeling the way she feels because it isn't backed up by data that he likes. Way to make her point there, my dude. Calling the US a police state and saying the conservative base is cheering on Nazis assaulting trans people is not “relaying a personal experience.” If you want to relay a personal experience and be free of criticism it can be done in Blogs. If you want to say scurrilous things about a group of people or a country in the Politics thread people have a right to question it. It’s one or the other. To be fair plasmid isn’t even the one using their identify to deflect criticism of their claims, that’s what other people are doing for them. This is everything that’s wrong with political discourse in this country. People in this thread thinking it’s fine and dandy to attack conservatives as Nazi-loving transphobes and then use identity politics to shut down any disagreement. No one here is making the argument that, because someone is a transgender person, they should not face criticism. Absolutely no one. This claim of BJ is completely false and unsubstantiated, and it can only be a result of BJ engaging in bad faith interpretation of people's comments. plasmidghost has presented actual evidence for their claims, which BJ is completely ignoring. He has never addressed any of it and he keeps circling the evidence in favor of his accusation against plasmid. When the evidence is presented, BJ does - contrary to what would be expected from actual good faith argumentation - not address it honestly and incorporate it into the argument at large, but instead paints himself as the victim of identity politics gone awry. Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation. This is wholly being done in bad faith. I can't possibly consider this a genuine form of argumentation. BJ is not a victim in this board, yet portrays himself as such over and over again. Which I find especially bizarre this time considering the person he's criticizing is a real victim of real perpetration. “Ironic, considering that plasmid has spoken out against identity politics in the past - again something that BJ deliberately ignores in favor of his own argumentation.” First of all, that’s a complete falsehood. I specifically said in my last post that PG is not the one using their identity to deflect criticism and that it’s other people doing it on their behalf. In fact what I actually said was it’s incredibly patronizing to PG to defend them with this “omg how dare you” attitude as if PG is too fragile to have their claims challenged on a politics forum. Second, I never said trans people don’t face any persecution. I said it’s simply not the case that they are being beaten in the street by Nazis that are celebrated by the conservative base. That it’s hyperbole and inaccurate to pretend like it’s only a matter of time before they are sent to concentration camps. Neo-Nazis protesting a drag Queen story hour does not substantiate those claims. Drag queens are not even the same thing as transgendered people by the way. Obviously it can be very easy to muddy the water here to try to foist the position of “BJ thinks trans people don’t face any discrimination” on me. It’s obviously not something I’m arguing. Third, maybe you’ve completely missed the trend here so let me tie this in for you. A poll showed that over half of very liberal people believed the police kill over 1,000 unarmed black people per year. The real number is about 10. Another poll showed that 41% of Democrats estimated your chance of being hospitalized if you caught COVID was 50% or greater. The actual chance was 1%. So to me it’s obvious that Democrats/Liberals overestimate the perceived threats of things and not just by a little bit but by a factor of 50 or 100. You can’t solve problems if you can’t even accurately grasp the magnitude of the problem. San Francisco, probably the most liberal city, considered these problems more grave than other cities and adopted policies that reflected that. Now they have an understaffed police department, countless businesses have closed their doors and the entirely city is spiraling into a shit sandwich in no time quick. I’m always met with the same hostility when I point out the irrationality of how liberals overestimate any of these things. “How dare you belittle PG’s life experience, he fled the country to escape persecution!” “How dare you downplay COVID, my grandmother died of COVID!” “How dare you imply black people don’t face discrimination from police, Black Lives Matter!” Emotional arguments that people think ought to trump objective reality. Good faith argumentation, no doubt. Speaking for myself, my intention when I do respond to you is never that it makes me feel good. I hate reading and responding to your comments, that's why I'm usually shortening my responses to you as much as possible while only getting my main message across. Your argumentation regarding LGBTQ issues is just bad, I haven't seen a single comment from you on that matter that I can mostly agree with. For some reason you think this is our problem. The people disagreeing with you are somehow the problem. I have a very hard time understanding your thought process that leads you to a conclusion like the one of people wanting to protect poor transgender people's feelings. No, your argumentation is bad. It's really, really bad. That's why we're arguing with you. But it's pissing me off and it's stealing my time and energy, so with each occasion that this happens I'm less and less inclined to put quality effort into it. This is also why plasmidghost is leaving. You're completely insufferable in this regard. I got it from you saying I’m “contributing to the pain of LGBTQ people” because I disagree with the notions that conservatives are celebrating Nazis that assault trans people and that there’s not a trans genocide going on. Isn’t that what that means? I’m not causing physical pain, right? That would be impossible through the internet. So I must be causing them emotional pain. Another word for emotions is feelings. If this is another bad faith interpretation of your words then I’m sorry, maybe I just have a poor grasp of English.
Of course it's emotional pain you're causing and not physical. But that part of my argument is not priority when I respond to you, it's an addition. You focus on that part and ignore the factual parts because that's more convenient to you. The claims you make about transgender people got blown out of the water, and so far you've failed to acknowledge that - instead painting the discussion as if it were about your general tone or attitude. This is one of the main reasons that causes exasperation in people when they discuss things with you: your strong tendency to shift the argument away from the core point to side issues, to entirely irrelevant issues, and even to strawmen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
