|
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 |
On July 11 2023 14:49 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 14:35 KwarK wrote:On July 11 2023 13:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is. Its a very uncomfortable truth I take no pleasure in admitting, but I will say the trans women I know on HRT definitely all suffer from what is essentially roid-rage. We should give them the same considerations as other people who are medicated for issues leading to behavioral/personality abnormalities. There are reasons people with certain mental disorders are given disability considerations by their employer and/or the government. They are in a uniquely difficult situation and sympathy is a moral obligation as a member of society. We ought to be kind and empathetic towards people who are suffering without any guilt or blame. If someone is being roid-ragey, other people are not bound by moral imperative to spend time with them. And of course no one should tolerate physical violence in any context. But I have not found physical violence from trans women to be common at all. Easily pissed off, overly-argumentative, and generally overly impassioned? Yeah, often. But there's no reason to assume trans women will be violent. I don't think you are wrong to point out the dynamic exists, but are you saying trans women should be treated differently from the beginning, or responded to when they have behavioral issues? It is a crucial distinction. He didn't describe physical violence from the drunk girl, just anger. There was no violence coming from the women in his rambling string of words. The first assault that took place was when clutz and his buddies find a drunk girl and forcibly make her do things because they think she's too angry. Dude was literally complaining that it's harder to assault trans women than cis. He didn't even say that trans women are more likely to be angry, only that when confronted with an angry trans woman he's less willing to find his buddy and overpower her. It was a very very strange post. Wombs are valuable and therefore if you see a drunk girl in a bar then you should find a buddy and overpower her. That's the only way to make her less angry. But do a penis check first because if she's trans then it won't calm her down and may even make her more angry. He said "barfight" and "(except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability)". So he was describing both violence and the impact of HRT. I think he was referring to how HRT can alter behavior.
I usually don't post just to point out when someone else's post is absolute dogshit, but cLutZ's post absolutely does not deserve even a modicum of validation. He's talking about them hypothetically fighting drunk (not mood swings from hormone therapy) as an excuse for treating them poorly, how trans-women should somehow stay as cis-men (or turn into cis-women?) just so we have an easier time subduing them, and how trans people are ugly and messed up. You may be bringing up an interesting trans topic or two of your own, but what cLutZ wrote is absolute poison.
|
On July 11 2023 07:52 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 07:30 Magic Powers wrote:On July 11 2023 07:03 BlackJack wrote:On July 11 2023 05:22 Magic Powers wrote:On July 11 2023 04:37 BlackJack wrote:On July 10 2023 22:17 Liquid`Drone wrote:On July 10 2023 18:54 Razyda wrote:On July 10 2023 18:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 10 2023 18:19 Razyda wrote:On July 10 2023 17:09 Salazarz wrote:
Bottomline, why does it even matter if trans women are truly and genuinely 'female womens'? If they aren't 'real female womens' and are just pretending, who the fuck cares? What about a guy makebelieving that he is a woman offend your sensitivities so much? And please, don't tell me 'danger for real ladies in bathrooms' or 'muh fair sports', both of those are extreme fringe cases that are A) being looked at, B) far less damaging to the society as a whole than transphobia and anti-trans violence is.
If someone wants to roleplay being a woman, why can't you just let them be? You don't have to interact with them, you don't have to have sex with them; literally all they want from you is to not be hated and attacked. Is that too much to ask? You don't have to agree in everything those damn lefties believe in, you don't have to think it's right -- but why do you feel the need to aggressively oppose them?
Personally, I don't believe in Jesus or Allah, but you don't see me going around telling every Christian and every Muslim how damn idiotic their beliefs are and how they need to educate themselves on the realities of our world. Why can't we all at the very least extend the same courtesy towards the LGBTQ community? Thing is almost no one have issue with trans people, people have issue with: Books like "this book is gay" being in school libraries Lower ranked male athletes transitioning and suddenly winning in woman categories Teachers supporting secondary school girl claim that she is a cat and calling her classmates despicable for questioning that then telling them they should change school. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jun/23/child-identifying-as-cat-controversy-from-a-tiktok-video-to-media-frenzyGuardian article with link to recording so judge for yourself: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22735585/fury-teacher-scolded-pupil-identify-cat/Teacher telling students “you can’t be Canadian. You don’t belong here.” for skipping school during pride events https://edmontonjournal.com/news/edmonton-school-distances-itself-from-recording-of-teacher-lecturing-students-for-skipping-pride-themed-activitiesSexual offenders changing their gender and getting jailtime in woman prison: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11677219/Trans-rapist-female-prison-proves-legal-sacrificed-vulnerable-women-Julie-Bindel-says.html"Of the 230 inmates in the UK currently living under a different gender identity, 97 — some 42 per cent — are in jail for sex crimes" "Among these jailed inmates living under a different gender identity are 44 who have been convicted of rape and 14 who forced underage children into sexual activity." Aren't people allowed to have issue with situations like that? Does having issue with this make them transphobes? I would say that this things require discussion, otherwise they will remain unsolved. That cat student thing was in the UK, not the US, and it wasn't even a cat thing. Your article states : "All this, despite the school itself saying no children had identified “as a cat or any other animal”. The controversy began when a student secretly recorded the discussion involving year 8 pupils at Rye college in East Sussex. In the excerpt posted to TikTok, a pupil describes the idea of another pupil identifying as a cow or cat as “crazy” and extends her remarks to include biological sex and gender as binary."If you want to talk about that non-issue in the UK, post it in a UK thread please.
Edit: A lot of your issues/links aren't about the US. Why? Do you think no one in the US hear/read those stories? Do you think this stories do not impact their view on trans rights? How come you didnt rise similar complain when PG linked article from Australia? As for cat story I gave link to actual recording too. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12211691/EXCLUSIVE-Mother-Year-8-pupil-scolded-gender-proud-her.html"Some of the others in the class started laughing and the girl who thinks she’s a cat started crying." You really think '8 year old went too far with play pretend, some kids laughed at her, teachers wanted them not to bully her and her mom defends her' is a story that inspires an important debate? 8 year old? It says grade 8 which would be 13 year olds. Seems a little late in the game to be using the “they are just a child playing pretend” argument. At some point you should be able to handle being told you’re not actually a cat without the adults jumping in to shelter you by telling your peers they need to go to another school. I used to believe I have magic powers (hence my name). I stopped believing in magic roughly when I turned 20 or so. I don't think a 13 y/o girl believing she's a cat is of harm to anyone. I'm more worried about others harming her, as evidenced by the fact that she cried because she got ridiculed. So you think we should reinforce people's delusions so as to not upset them? Do you think you're setting someone up to succeed in adulthood if you're coddling them so severely that you to pretend they are a cat so as to not upset them? Again this is a 13 year old, not a toddler. I think the idea that you're doing less harm here is extremely short-sighted. Taking a page out of your sarcasm playbook, yes we should pretend that Peter Pan is real and women get pregnant from a kiss. I don't know what you want me to say. Kids don't need the truth forcefed to them. They'll figure things out for themselves eventually. Many adults are immature in countless ways and yet somehow the world hasn't fallen apart. I don't think it matters if some people think they're bunnies that poop rainbows. I really don't. There are many adults who think ghosts are real. What tragic event is going to happen because of their belief? Oh no, people believe in ghosts. And in horoscopes. And in a great skydaddy. And in the afterlife. Big deal. That's not what causes them to succeed or fail at leading good lives. Terrible food in grocery stores, that's a much more likely culprit behind the failure of a society's individuals. Starvation due to destroyed crops caused by global warming. That's the dangerous stuff. What matters is that kids have a good shot at living a good life and that they have the rights they deserve. We should treat them well and with kindness, and not force every single one of our views into their heads. Sometimes it doesn't matter if we're right or wrong. Sometimes what matters is kindness and nothing else. That's part of being an adult - learning to set priorities in life. Lets maybe not blow the fantasies of little kids completely out of proportion. Yes adolescents eventually figure it out for themselves because the vast majority of humans will reorient the adolescents to reality, even if it may make them cry. If the vast majority of humans actually placated the delusions of people pretending to be cats or bunnies that poop rainbows we might have a different outcome. I'd say we don't try that weird social experiment just out of the hopes that nobody will ever have to cry again. Also nobody is saying to go around telling 5 year olds that Santa isn't real. Again, we are talking about a 13 year old. This is considered an early adult in many cultures, for example the age at which a Jew would be bar/bat mitzvah'd. Infantilizing teenagers by thinking they are too fragile to be told their fantasies aren't real is just weird at best and harmful at worst.
I think even adults are allowed to have delusions. The same is tenfold true for children. As long as they don't harm others or themselves in the process, I see no reason to object. I don't think we should feed into their delusions, but I think it's right to leave them to their own devices unless we can prove that their ideas are actually harmful in some capacity. Did the 13 y/o girl force others to accept that she's a cat? Because if she didn't, then where's the victim of her beliefs?
We allow kids to DO things that are provably harmful to them, like eating refined sugar and trans fats. But we can't allow them to BELIEVE things that are NOT provably harmful to anyone?
Also, just look back at how tooth and nail our discussions have gone in the covid thread. Did you budge? Did I budge? Hardly. That's because it doesn't matter which one of us is deluded, we both exhibit typical behavior: holding on to our beliefs regardless of what other people say. And yet, even though one of us has to be wrong about covid, somehow we're both functioning members of society.
So what good does it do to force a little girl to accept that she's not a cat? How is that going to improve her life or that of others? I think the onus is on other people to prove that her belief is harmful, not on her that she's a cat. If adults are allowed to have delusions, then kids in particular should be free to believe whatever they want.
The girl got ridiculed over an innocuous belief, and I think that's provably harmful. I consider it a mild form of bullying. That's what tells me who should face repercussions. It's not the girl. It's the other kids.
On July 11 2023 07:17 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 05:14 Magic Powers wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. Let me be honest with you. As a cis man, I also have a hard time explaining to you what it means to me to be a man. I've thought about it occasionally, and I still can't figure it out. For the most part the reason why I consider myself a man is that I'm just used to the idea. The only thing I know is that I'm more similar to men than to women. This doesn't tell me very much about my own manhood. I went to a grocery store once to buy some spirit, and the clerk (a young woman) asked me for my ID. I was 25 at the time. The legal purchasing age for spirits was 18. I thought it was absurd. How could I possibly not pass as a grown man, a full seven years after legally becoming one? Fortunately I was never asked for my ID since, but that experience stuck with me for a while. It did upset me in the moment, but more importantly it also made me question what it means to be a man. Maybe I had the wrong idea about it? Maybe it wasn't so much about appearance or biological fact, and more about what's inside? Granted, that was an anecdote about my age, not my gender. But age, I would argue, is easily as essential to our identity as gender. I can tell similar stories about how old people used to misgender me when I was a kid, thinking I was a girl because of my relatively feminine features. The elderly grew up in a simpler world, when distinctions between boys and girls were more apparent, as they were often enforced. We've been moving away from these distinctions. I think it's time to rethink our understanding of many things. Yeah, I tried pondering this myself and failed. Perhaps it is more intuitive/emotive than it is grounded in anything particularly logically abstractable or able to be easily articulated. P.S. perhaps you weren’t wrong as a child on the magic powers thing, you’ve an incredible patience and commitment to articulating your arguments, which by modern internet standards may as well be magic!
Thanks mate, I appreciate your kind words. Cheers to you 
|
On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is.
This might just be the single most bigoted thing I've ever seen anybody type on a message board.
|
On July 11 2023 22:35 Mikau wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is. This might just be the single most bigoted thing I've ever seen anybody type on a message board.
It really is packed to the brim, no words are wasted and no room is really left for a charitable interpretation. It's a surprisingly efficient expression of ignorance, and I for one am impressed.
|
If this forum was as obsessed with memorializing unhinged posts as Twitter is, that one would stick around a while. Transphobia on its own isn’t that memorable, but “physically overpowering angry drunk girls is an important part of my lifestyle so a girl my buddies can’t overpower is a big problem” and “trans men don’t realize how bad men have it because wombs and eggs are valuable, and sperm aren’t” are definitely some takes.
But also is there nothing happening in the world besides trans issues? Are we stuck on this until another SCOTUS term gives us something else to panic about?
|
The issue is that every few pages someone comes in and posts something totally bonkers, so the spiral goes again.
Else US politics seems pretty boring at the moment outside of Scotus rulings?
|
On July 11 2023 13:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 12:58 KwarK wrote:
He lost me around the part where he explained that one of the main disadvantages of trans women is that you and your buddies can't overpower them when they get drunk the way you normally would with a cis woman. Trans-men have the strength of a dozen cis-men. I heard Hercules was trans.
I wanna salvage this discussion by saying there's a Hiscules joke in there somewhere.
|
On July 11 2023 15:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 14:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 14:35 KwarK wrote:On July 11 2023 13:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is. Its a very uncomfortable truth I take no pleasure in admitting, but I will say the trans women I know on HRT definitely all suffer from what is essentially roid-rage. We should give them the same considerations as other people who are medicated for issues leading to behavioral/personality abnormalities. There are reasons people with certain mental disorders are given disability considerations by their employer and/or the government. They are in a uniquely difficult situation and sympathy is a moral obligation as a member of society. We ought to be kind and empathetic towards people who are suffering without any guilt or blame. If someone is being roid-ragey, other people are not bound by moral imperative to spend time with them. And of course no one should tolerate physical violence in any context. But I have not found physical violence from trans women to be common at all. Easily pissed off, overly-argumentative, and generally overly impassioned? Yeah, often. But there's no reason to assume trans women will be violent. I don't think you are wrong to point out the dynamic exists, but are you saying trans women should be treated differently from the beginning, or responded to when they have behavioral issues? It is a crucial distinction. He didn't describe physical violence from the drunk girl, just anger. There was no violence coming from the women in his rambling string of words. The first assault that took place was when clutz and his buddies find a drunk girl and forcibly make her do things because they think she's too angry. Dude was literally complaining that it's harder to assault trans women than cis. He didn't even say that trans women are more likely to be angry, only that when confronted with an angry trans woman he's less willing to find his buddy and overpower her. It was a very very strange post. Wombs are valuable and therefore if you see a drunk girl in a bar then you should find a buddy and overpower her. That's the only way to make her less angry. But do a penis check first because if she's trans then it won't calm her down and may even make her more angry. He said "barfight" and "(except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability)". So he was describing both violence and the impact of HRT. I think he was referring to how HRT can alter behavior. I usually don't post just to point out when someone else's post is absolute dogshit, but cLutZ's post absolutely does not deserve even a modicum of validation. He's talking about them hypothetically fighting drunk (not mood swings from hormone therapy) as an excuse for treating them poorly, how trans-women should somehow stay as cis-men (or turn into cis-women?) just so we have an easier time subduing them, and how trans people are ugly and messed up. You may be bringing up an interesting trans topic or two of your own, but what cLutZ wrote is absolute poison.
This might sound silly, but hear me out:
Regardless of what any of us say here, there are no points, no prizes, and no awards for whether we "win" or "lose" an argument here. So then why participate? To learn about how other people think, let their perspectives dance with ours, and see if there is something we didn't consider or something we can learn.
GH, farv, ChristianS, Kwark, and Sermokala are all people I can think of off the top of my head who have truly changed the way I view the world. All of you have had impacts on me throughout my time here, and I don't mean to say everyone else is insignificant, but I do want to point out those 5 as having made major impacts on how I view the world.
So when I read Clutz's message, it was easy to take the perspective you did, that he is saying trans women are shitty because you can't assault them as easily. But I really don't think he would bother saying that. Its not just the sort of thing he would spend his time doing. He has a very unique way of thinking and can sometimes appear non-human, but I think its just that he uses a lot less baseline assumptions when assessing morality than most people do.
So I tried to think of what he could actually mean, or what would be a perspective more worthy of being engaged with. I think him using the physical power of trans women as a point of interest indicates he was pointing out there are major differences in trans and cis women from a raw strength perspective, which we all agree on. It is the reason trans women in sports is a major topic.
The trans roid-rage I described is very real and its not worthwhile to pretend it isn't real. So if the goal in participating in this channel is to immerse ourselves in other people's world-views and perspectives, shouldn't we always give people the most generous read on what they are saying? Shouldn't we want the argument of someone we disagree with to be as strong as possible, so that we are more engaged, stimulated, and enlightened by it?
And just to be clear, its not that I feel like I am making up some better idea for Clutz. I think you guys are hugely misunderstanding his post. I don't blame you, since boy oh boy does he have a unique way of communicating, but I do think this is mostly a misunderstanding and he used a really problematic way to make a point lol
|
United States41958 Posts
On July 11 2023 14:49 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 14:35 KwarK wrote:On July 11 2023 13:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is. Its a very uncomfortable truth I take no pleasure in admitting, but I will say the trans women I know on HRT definitely all suffer from what is essentially roid-rage. We should give them the same considerations as other people who are medicated for issues leading to behavioral/personality abnormalities. There are reasons people with certain mental disorders are given disability considerations by their employer and/or the government. They are in a uniquely difficult situation and sympathy is a moral obligation as a member of society. We ought to be kind and empathetic towards people who are suffering without any guilt or blame. If someone is being roid-ragey, other people are not bound by moral imperative to spend time with them. And of course no one should tolerate physical violence in any context. But I have not found physical violence from trans women to be common at all. Easily pissed off, overly-argumentative, and generally overly impassioned? Yeah, often. But there's no reason to assume trans women will be violent. I don't think you are wrong to point out the dynamic exists, but are you saying trans women should be treated differently from the beginning, or responded to when they have behavioral issues? It is a crucial distinction. He didn't describe physical violence from the drunk girl, just anger. There was no violence coming from the women in his rambling string of words. The first assault that took place was when clutz and his buddies find a drunk girl and forcibly make her do things because they think she's too angry. Dude was literally complaining that it's harder to assault trans women than cis. He didn't even say that trans women are more likely to be angry, only that when confronted with an angry trans woman he's less willing to find his buddy and overpower her. It was a very very strange post. Wombs are valuable and therefore if you see a drunk girl in a bar then you should find a buddy and overpower her. That's the only way to make her less angry. But do a penis check first because if she's trans then it won't calm her down and may even make her more angry. He said "barfight" and "(except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability)". So he was describing both violence and the impact of HRT. I think he was referring to how HRT can alter behavior.
Nah, the cis and trans girls are both angry in his scenario. He presents us with the daily experience that we all share of seeing an angry cis girl and grabbing a buddy to overpower her. Then he poses the question of what would happen if that were instead a trans girl. She would have the strength to fight back and do a bar fight would ensue.
The trans girls aren’t more angry, they’re just harder to overpower. And that’s why trans girls are bad. When you and your buddy assault one, as you would a cis woman, you end up in a fight.
There’s not really a good interpretation to what he said because the starting assumptions are so fucking weird. Like I don’t know about the rest of you but I don’t grab drunk girls to help them calm down. If a girl is drunk and angry and trying to start an argument with someone or whatever then I steer the fuck clear of that shit. The idea that as a man it is my right and prerogative to overpower women for their own sake is so bizarre to me I don’t really know how to respond to it beyond “absolutely not”. Even if I genuinely believe that a timeout is what this adult woman requires it is absolutely not okay to grab a buddy and pin her down. He put the word “forcibly” in his post, it’s just all so weird.
The rest of his post is just the natural logical progression from that fucking weird starting point. He’s treating testosterone as a weapon that makes women harder to assault and this is a bad thing for the women because being forcibly pinned down by clutz and his buddies is the optimal state of affairs. It’s like if he made an argument for gun control as a good thing for women by starting with how much harder it is to assault women who are armed as if that’s something normal we all do on a daily basis.
|
On July 12 2023 01:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 15:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 11 2023 14:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 14:35 KwarK wrote:On July 11 2023 13:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is. Its a very uncomfortable truth I take no pleasure in admitting, but I will say the trans women I know on HRT definitely all suffer from what is essentially roid-rage. We should give them the same considerations as other people who are medicated for issues leading to behavioral/personality abnormalities. There are reasons people with certain mental disorders are given disability considerations by their employer and/or the government. They are in a uniquely difficult situation and sympathy is a moral obligation as a member of society. We ought to be kind and empathetic towards people who are suffering without any guilt or blame. If someone is being roid-ragey, other people are not bound by moral imperative to spend time with them. And of course no one should tolerate physical violence in any context. But I have not found physical violence from trans women to be common at all. Easily pissed off, overly-argumentative, and generally overly impassioned? Yeah, often. But there's no reason to assume trans women will be violent. I don't think you are wrong to point out the dynamic exists, but are you saying trans women should be treated differently from the beginning, or responded to when they have behavioral issues? It is a crucial distinction. He didn't describe physical violence from the drunk girl, just anger. There was no violence coming from the women in his rambling string of words. The first assault that took place was when clutz and his buddies find a drunk girl and forcibly make her do things because they think she's too angry. Dude was literally complaining that it's harder to assault trans women than cis. He didn't even say that trans women are more likely to be angry, only that when confronted with an angry trans woman he's less willing to find his buddy and overpower her. It was a very very strange post. Wombs are valuable and therefore if you see a drunk girl in a bar then you should find a buddy and overpower her. That's the only way to make her less angry. But do a penis check first because if she's trans then it won't calm her down and may even make her more angry. He said "barfight" and "(except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability)". So he was describing both violence and the impact of HRT. I think he was referring to how HRT can alter behavior. I usually don't post just to point out when someone else's post is absolute dogshit, but cLutZ's post absolutely does not deserve even a modicum of validation. He's talking about them hypothetically fighting drunk (not mood swings from hormone therapy) as an excuse for treating them poorly, how trans-women should somehow stay as cis-men (or turn into cis-women?) just so we have an easier time subduing them, and how trans people are ugly and messed up. You may be bringing up an interesting trans topic or two of your own, but what cLutZ wrote is absolute poison. This might sound silly, but hear me out: Regardless of what any of us say here, there are no points, no prizes, and no awards for whether we "win" or "lose" an argument here. So then why participate? To learn about how other people think, let their perspectives dance with ours, and see if there is something we didn't consider or something we can learn. GH, farv, ChristianS, Kwark, and Sermokala are all people I can think of off the top of my head who have truly changed the way I view the world. All of you have had impacts on me throughout my time here, and I don't mean to say everyone else is insignificant, but I do want to point out those 5 as having made major impacts on how I view the world. So when I read Clutz's message, it was easy to take the perspective you did, that he is saying trans women are shitty because you can't assault them as easily. But I really don't think he would bother saying that. Its not just the sort of thing he would spend his time doing. He has a very unique way of thinking and can sometimes appear non-human, but I think its just that he uses a lot less baseline assumptions when assessing morality than most people do. So I tried to think of what he could actually mean, or what would be a perspective more worthy of being engaged with. I think him using the physical power of trans women as a point of interest indicates he was pointing out there are major differences in trans and cis women from a raw strength perspective, which we all agree on. It is the reason trans women in sports is a major topic. The trans roid-rage I described is very real and its not worthwhile to pretend it isn't real. So if the goal in participating in this channel is to immerse ourselves in other people's world-views and perspectives, shouldn't we always give people the most generous read on what they are saying? Shouldn't we want the argument of someone we disagree with to be as strong as possible, so that we are more engaged, stimulated, and enlightened by it? And just to be clear, its not that I feel like I am making up some better idea for Clutz. I think you guys are hugely misunderstanding his post. I don't blame you, since boy oh boy does he have a unique way of communicating, but I do think this is mostly a misunderstanding and he used a really problematic way to make a point lol
It feels hard to work around the idea that Clutz isn't just being casually sexist and transphobic, though. Myself, I certainly was casually sexist as a kid and didn't realize it until someone delivered an earned ass-kicking, which I'm sure is a concept Clutz could appreciate.
I think generally people will agree that sexism and transphobia are issues that exist in NA at large, and part of the push towards something closer to egalitarian society is calling out casual sexism / homophobia / transphobia where it occurs. I don't think this is the wrong approach.
That said, I do see a nugget in what you're saying that leans towards "Yo, Clutz is just a normal fucking dude" and I think there is value in that. I don't think Clutz is evil or anything, he's just like a lot of dudes I've worked with or hung out with. If you're never presented with the idea of all women having value outside of their looks and society largely playing in to women being valuable for that, you won't naturally craft the idea that the perceived 'natural order' is constructed and incorrect. It takes people the listener might actually respect bringing up the idea in a respectable way for it to gain any traction.
In that regard, I regret dogpiling on to the ridicule, and I'll try to do better.
|
It just reads like clutz is an MRA or something. There's a whiff to that post like the US is secretly a matriarchy and men are the oppressed victims at all times. So of course it's crucially important to make sure you stamp out transgender people, because you need to pick the right target when you assault a "real" woman. Otherwise you're just targeting a man who's portraying himself as a woman to reap the privileges that come with being a woman, and also they might be able to fight back. It's just weird all around.
|
On July 11 2023 23:30 Velr wrote:
The issue is that every few pages someone comes in and posts something totally bonkers, so the spiral goes again.
Else US politics seems pretty boring at the moment outside of Scotus rulings?
There may or may not be a teamsters strike at ups. Trump is asking for the courts to make a precedent that complaining for office should shield you from prosecution. Mtg got kicked out of the far right freedom caucus for fighting with bobart. Tubervile is not allowing a new marine commanding officer to take office and thinks white supremacist are just American and not racist. Sag could go on strike soon because of ai. Harvard is being sued over legacy admissions like I said they would be.
That's all off the top of my head
|
On July 12 2023 01:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 15:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 11 2023 14:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 14:35 KwarK wrote:On July 11 2023 13:49 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 11:57 cLutZ wrote:On July 11 2023 05:32 Mohdoo wrote:On July 11 2023 04:33 cLutZ wrote:On July 10 2023 15:51 Mikau wrote:On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
The fact that there exist confusing edge cases of these is a natural consequence of nature's foibles.
On July 10 2023 14:01 cLutZ wrote:
None of those questions actually apply to trans people.
Why are you accepting one set of 'confusing edge cases' as being natural but dismiss the very real edge case being discussed here? Is it perhaps because you want to pretend that trans people aren't just "natural consequences of nature's foibles"? Because Trans people aren't even capable of telling me what they are asking for. Again, the mantra is "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman." They aren't even telling me what they are identifying as, because it is recursive. This is completely different than people who are genetically XX but have reproductive issues so severe they never generated an egg, don't undergo puberty, etc. In fact, I am totally fine excluding such severe cases from both the female and the woman classifications. I think that result is strictly superior to allowing some .01% thing break all of biological classifications for dimorphic species. We can call all individuals without gametes unsexed. I am honestly lost at this point. I can't tell what perspectives you are currently putting forth. In which situations do you believe a trans woman should be treated differently than a cis woman? We can ignore the obvious stuff like medical stuff or getting pregnant or whatever. I think they should be treated differently in pretty much all instances. Bathrooms, sports, medical, and even social situations. We've all experienced a woman who is a little drunk and raging at people over something. Great thing about this is two men can just forcibly sit her down with no real risk to any of the 3. A MTF? Heck no. Now what we have is just a barfight where someone is in drag. That is actually one of the real problems with a large swathe of the MTF population: They have the temperament of a man (except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability), with at least a portion of the build and strength of one, while expecting the social deference of a woman. TBH, it generally strikes me a fairly large social cost with all the benefits just going to the trans individual. OTOH FTM are generally cases where I find myself just saddened. The MTFs are the loud mouthpieces of the movement, but the FTMs are increasingly the larger cohort among the young, and they almost all generally strike me as sad. E. Page is the face of my perception of this phenomenon, but I see that experience of shock with the two I know IRL (through work). Both went from conventionally attractive women to conventionally unattractive men, and are now even more depressed (one was eventually fired after they didn't come into the office for 5 months due to the depression). This is how I know a man doesn't know what it is to identify as a woman, because the women that try to identify as a man run straight into sticker shock at how little the world gives a shit about you. I think this societal duality is fine and just. Sperm is cheap, eggs and wombs are not. Other people may disagree with such a sentiment, but, there it is. Its a very uncomfortable truth I take no pleasure in admitting, but I will say the trans women I know on HRT definitely all suffer from what is essentially roid-rage. We should give them the same considerations as other people who are medicated for issues leading to behavioral/personality abnormalities. There are reasons people with certain mental disorders are given disability considerations by their employer and/or the government. They are in a uniquely difficult situation and sympathy is a moral obligation as a member of society. We ought to be kind and empathetic towards people who are suffering without any guilt or blame. If someone is being roid-ragey, other people are not bound by moral imperative to spend time with them. And of course no one should tolerate physical violence in any context. But I have not found physical violence from trans women to be common at all. Easily pissed off, overly-argumentative, and generally overly impassioned? Yeah, often. But there's no reason to assume trans women will be violent. I don't think you are wrong to point out the dynamic exists, but are you saying trans women should be treated differently from the beginning, or responded to when they have behavioral issues? It is a crucial distinction. He didn't describe physical violence from the drunk girl, just anger. There was no violence coming from the women in his rambling string of words. The first assault that took place was when clutz and his buddies find a drunk girl and forcibly make her do things because they think she's too angry. Dude was literally complaining that it's harder to assault trans women than cis. He didn't even say that trans women are more likely to be angry, only that when confronted with an angry trans woman he's less willing to find his buddy and overpower her. It was a very very strange post. Wombs are valuable and therefore if you see a drunk girl in a bar then you should find a buddy and overpower her. That's the only way to make her less angry. But do a penis check first because if she's trans then it won't calm her down and may even make her more angry. He said "barfight" and "(except even more messed up now because they have gained some hormonal instability)". So he was describing both violence and the impact of HRT. I think he was referring to how HRT can alter behavior. I usually don't post just to point out when someone else's post is absolute dogshit, but cLutZ's post absolutely does not deserve even a modicum of validation. He's talking about them hypothetically fighting drunk (not mood swings from hormone therapy) as an excuse for treating them poorly, how trans-women should somehow stay as cis-men (or turn into cis-women?) just so we have an easier time subduing them, and how trans people are ugly and messed up. You may be bringing up an interesting trans topic or two of your own, but what cLutZ wrote is absolute poison. This might sound silly, but hear me out: Regardless of what any of us say here, there are no points, no prizes, and no awards for whether we "win" or "lose" an argument here. So then why participate? To learn about how other people think, let their perspectives dance with ours, and see if there is something we didn't consider or something we can learn. GH, farv, ChristianS, Kwark, and Sermokala are all people I can think of off the top of my head who have truly changed the way I view the world. All of you have had impacts on me throughout my time here, and I don't mean to say everyone else is insignificant, but I do want to point out those 5 as having made major impacts on how I view the world. So when I read Clutz's message, it was easy to take the perspective you did, that he is saying trans women are shitty because you can't assault them as easily. But I really don't think he would bother saying that. Its not just the sort of thing he would spend his time doing. He has a very unique way of thinking and can sometimes appear non-human, but I think its just that he uses a lot less baseline assumptions when assessing morality than most people do. So I tried to think of what he could actually mean, or what would be a perspective more worthy of being engaged with. I think him using the physical power of trans women as a point of interest indicates he was pointing out there are major differences in trans and cis women from a raw strength perspective, which we all agree on. It is the reason trans women in sports is a major topic. The trans roid-rage I described is very real and its not worthwhile to pretend it isn't real. So if the goal in participating in this channel is to immerse ourselves in other people's world-views and perspectives, shouldn't we always give people the most generous read on what they are saying? Shouldn't we want the argument of someone we disagree with to be as strong as possible, so that we are more engaged, stimulated, and enlightened by it? And just to be clear, its not that I feel like I am making up some better idea for Clutz. I think you guys are hugely misunderstanding his post. I don't blame you, since boy oh boy does he have a unique way of communicating, but I do think this is mostly a misunderstanding and he used a really problematic way to make a point lol
It's one thing to give a charitable interpretation of what someone says. It's another thing to ignore what's actually being said and respond to what you wish they had said instead. This isn't about earning points with like-minded people, and it's not about the fact that other posts and TLers have been insightful. I don't think cLutZ is "non-human" or bad faith here, but I also don't think he made any good-faith arguments in that post that need to be academically scrutinized or debated. He just went on a transphobic rant. It is what it is. Personally, I'm not going to waste any more time on that specific post.
On July 12 2023 00:00 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 13:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 11 2023 12:58 KwarK wrote:
He lost me around the part where he explained that one of the main disadvantages of trans women is that you and your buddies can't overpower them when they get drunk the way you normally would with a cis woman. Trans-men have the strength of a dozen cis-men. I heard Hercules was trans. I wanna salvage this discussion by saying there's a Hiscules joke in there somewhere.
I appreciate the attempt
|
On July 12 2023 02:14 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2023 23:30 Velr wrote:
The issue is that every few pages someone comes in and posts something totally bonkers, so the spiral goes again.
Else US politics seems pretty boring at the moment outside of Scotus rulings? There may or may not be a teamsters strike at ups. Trump is asking for the courts to make a precedent that complaining for office should shield you from prosecution. Mtg got kicked out of the far right freedom caucus for fighting with bobart. Tubervile is not allowing a new marine commanding officer to take office and thinks white supremacist are just American and not racist. Sag could go on strike soon because of ai. Harvard is being sued over legacy admissions like I said they would be. That's all off the top of my head
This is surprising to me. Isn't MTG more popular and more visible of a figure than LB? I wouldn't have thought they'd excommunicate MTG. I don't mind that group getting weaker though.
|
|
|
From what I saw McCarty 'bought' Greene by making her speaker and the rest of the Freedom Causus no longer trust her and are afraid she is passing their internal discussions and game plan along to him.
Basically she wasn't kicked because of her fight with Bobart, tho I'm sure that played a part, but because they suspect her of being a double agent.
|
On July 12 2023 05:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2023 02:14 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2023 23:30 Velr wrote:
The issue is that every few pages someone comes in and posts something totally bonkers, so the spiral goes again.
Else US politics seems pretty boring at the moment outside of Scotus rulings? There may or may not be a teamsters strike at ups. Trump is asking for the courts to make a precedent that complaining for office should shield you from prosecution. Mtg got kicked out of the far right freedom caucus for fighting with bobart. Tubervile is not allowing a new marine commanding officer to take office and thinks white supremacist are just American and not racist. Sag could go on strike soon because of ai. Harvard is being sued over legacy admissions like I said they would be. That's all off the top of my head This is surprising to me. Isn't MTG more popular and more visible of a figure than LB? I wouldn't have thought they'd excommunicate MTG. I don't mind that group getting weaker though.
It was for being too sycophantic towards McCarthy supposedly.
I don't know how much it weakens them but it does make me concerned about even the "best case scenario" where Democrats win the house, senate, and presidency and the Republican party implodes as a national party.
They aren't going to be replaced with a more moderate party, and Democrats will enthusiastically welcome an even more ghoulish opposition to run against to lower the expectations for themselves rather than lift up a party to their left and displace the Republican party. Then it's just a matter of time before you get someone with all the ghoulish intentions combined with just the right seemingly innocuous rhetoric/charisma (Trump demonstrates it's actually a pretty wide runway to hit) to mask them enough for centrists to turn a blind eye, and that's all she wrote.
As it sits it'll probably be a coinflip on whether Trump is the next president (how do you still pretend you live in a "nation of laws" after that really?) and Trump's party might just take power and never let it go.
|
|
|
Infighting is healthy. It shows passion is alive and well and that there is interest in fulfilling their tasks as politicians. When everyone gets in line, it is never for a good reason. It is a sign that a party is ineffective and lacks ambition.
|
United States24568 Posts
Infighting five minutes before a deadline that will cause the economy to collapse?
I'd argue infighting is sometimes healthy and sometimes unhealthy. Everyone getting in line is sometimes healthy and sometimes unhealthy. I think your point was that the letter is sometimes unhealthy, not that the former is always healthy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
