| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom920 Posts
On July 17 2024 16:07 GreenHorizons wrote: Clearly you're unfamiliar with the Schwarzenegger library. + Show Spoiler + Who would have thought Demolition Man was too optimistic? I was probably aware at some point, but I'd completely forgotten that reference. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9607 Posts
On July 17 2024 16:22 WombaT wrote: As an aside, was watching ye olde regular TV news over here and Vance was getting airtime for cracking that with Labour in government the UK would be the first Islamist nuclear power. Aside from Pakistan already having nukes, and yes Islamic/Islamist are different things, albeit conservatives seem to just use them interchangeably. Was that just an off-the-cuff little jest he made to a certain audience, or reflective of some serious attitudes that he may hold? Like is he the type to say things like ‘Londonistan’ earnestly or what? I know very little of the bloke so was just seeking a bit of input from some who might be more familiar. Cheers He's trying to get himself any kind of reputation over here I think, while playing to the idiot domestic base who might consider such a thing remotely possible. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44173 Posts
On July 17 2024 16:14 WombaT wrote: I feel we just lack the language here, or at least the widespread adoption of language and concepts, so we end up in various daft scenarios like ‘define a woman’ thrown out as some kinda gotcha. Oddly enough rarely ‘define a man’, for whatever reason. On one far end of the scale no matter the evidence to the contrary some just refuse to recognise the biology/gender split, and thus the legitimacy of trans folk. On the other, people almost entirely discount the whole biological part of the equation. One can of course add specifiers such as biological or cis/trans to better clarify. I’m not the world’s foremost expert on the topic, I’ve read a bit around the place and some cultures have more fluid language for such things, and perhaps in a way that helps shape attitudes. Although sadly many of those cultures either don’t, or borderline don’t really exist anymore, certainly not enough to move the zeitgeist much. I personally don't see an issue with how this short sample conversation played out, and I think it stayed respectful and open-minded, especially when certain qualifiers and humility appeared. I'm sure that someone could devise a worse scenario that was extremely vitriolic and ignorant and truly did encourage violence against trans people, but that's essentially Matt Walsh's job. As for the other initial claim - "Say wrongthink about COVID and you're responsible for hate crimes on Asian people" - the term "wrongthink" is obviously so generic that it could include racist, anti-Asian speech, or it could include other statements that may indeed run contrary to mainstream opinions yet not attack Asians at all. One example of the former might be "I think Chinese-Americans were secretly involved in a plot to destabilize America by spreading their homeland's disease to real Americans". One example of the latter might be "At the beginning of the pandemic, I was telling everyone that my area of the country was closing down our schools and businesses when they probably didn't have to, and were therefore going to take a worse educational and economic hit from the pandemic than was needed, and I think I ended up being proven right". The prevailing wisdom from the experts is that Chinese-Americans were not secretly involved in such a plot, and that taking preemptive measures because of the potential severity of the pandemic is the best play, and so therefore both the former and latter quote could be considered "wrongthink". The former quote I created, I think, is pretty racist. The latter quote, I think, is a risk analysis that has the benefit of hindsight and may or may not be justified, since that individual doesn't know how costly it would have been for their area if they didn't proactively close down schools and businesses. The latter is essentially highlighting where one falls on the "better safe than sorry" approach, which incorporates how worried someone is about the risks and rewards of making the "ideal" call during the chaos and uncertainty of the pandemic. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany905 Posts
The only explanation I have, is basicly incels that are worried about falling for a guy in drag. I get that people can get obnoxious in their ways of "progressive is my whole personality" but you can just ignore those people - you don't have to get from conservative to regressive. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44173 Posts
On July 17 2024 19:46 KT_Elwood wrote: I honestly don't get why people are so offended by trans persons, or gay people. The only explanation I have, is basicly incels that are worried about falling for a guy in drag. I get that people can get obnoxious in their ways of "progressive is my whole personality" but you can just ignore those people - you don't have to get from conservative to regressive. I think some people who are anti-LGBTQ+ sincerely believe that the existence of that community endangers the safety, well-being, piety, and sanctity of other people. 99% of their sincere concerns could be dispelled with just a little research or a willingness to communicate with members of the LGBTQ+ community. I also think plenty of anti-LGBTQ+ individuals are insincerely attacking them as scapegoats for personal flaws and problems, just to have an external focus and outlet for their anger and hate and bigotry. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9607 Posts
On July 17 2024 19:46 KT_Elwood wrote: I honestly don't get why people are so offended by trans persons, or gay people. The only explanation I have, is basicly incels that are worried about falling for a guy in drag. I get that people can get obnoxious in their ways of "progressive is my whole personality" but you can just ignore those people - you don't have to get from conservative to regressive. Everyone's got a little bit of a gay hiding somewhere in their personality and they are all terrified of acknowledging it. That and they think the point of the existence of gays is to turn their kids gay. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany905 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17964 Posts
On July 17 2024 20:00 Jockmcplop wrote: Everyone's got a little bit of a gay hiding somewhere in their personality and they are all terrified of acknowledging it. That and they think the point of the existence of gays is to turn their kids gay. Also someone 2000+ years ago wrote a book about how gays are against god's will and half the world population (approx) believes that was indeed the will of god and refuse to accept anything other than some bigoted dude who wrote a book 2000+ years ago. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44173 Posts
On July 17 2024 20:43 Acrofales wrote: Also someone 2000+ years ago wrote a book about how gays are against god's will and half the world population (approx) believes that was indeed the will of god and refuse to accept anything other than some bigoted dude who wrote a book 2000+ years ago. Funny how they've mostly grown out of the Biblical support of slavery, but many still struggle with growing out of the Biblical condemning of homosexuality and support of misogyny. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44173 Posts
California Governor Gavin Newsom just signed a new law that protects trans rights, specifically the safety, privacy, and well-being of trans students (nearly all of which would be teenagers in middle school and high school). Throughout the country, there are some schools (usually in Republican districts) that have been passing rules that force teachers to tell parents when their children confide their gender identity or share preferred names/pronouns with teachers. In other words, teachers are sometimes required to "out" their trans students. This has been extremely problematic and dangerous for those students, as some of them don't feel comfortable coming out to their parents as trans yet (especially if it can result in kids being hated or hurt or kicked out of the house by their socially conservative families). It's also become very awkward for teachers, as they're put in the position of needing to "tattle" on their students while still wanting to have a good, trustworthy rapport with them. Fortunately, my school district doesn't have such an anti-trans policy in place, and has strong support systems set up to make navigating these situations less stressful and less antagonistic for our kids. Gavin Newsom's new law says that California public schools are not allowed to pressure teachers into outing their trans students to parents. I hope similar laws pop up in other states too. Nothing is stopping those trans teenagers from having that private talk with their parents, whenever the kids feel it's appropriate, and ultimately the protection of the children is what's most important. Notoriously anti-trans jerk and terrible parent, Elon Musk, who has a transgender daughter, has cited Newsom's law as the final straw for why he's moving Twitter/X and SpaceX from California to Texas: "Elon Musk has said he will move SpaceX and X out of California over a law that bans schools from forcing teachers to notify parents when their child changes their gender identity. Musk said on Tuesday that he would relocate the companies’ headquarters to Texas after California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the first-of-its-kind law barring policies that require educators to disclose when a student asks to use a different name or pronouns. “This is the final straw,” Musk said on X. “Because of this law and the many others that preceded it, attacking both families and companies, SpaceX will now move its HQ from Hawthorne, California, to Starbase, Texas.”" https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2024/7/17/elon-musk-says-he-will-move-companies-out-of-california-over-trans-law | ||
|
Introvert
United States4725 Posts
On July 17 2024 21:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Funny how they've mostly grown out of the Biblical support of slavery, but many still struggle with growing out of the Biblical condemning of homosexuality and support of misogyny. The early abolitionist movement relied heavily on the Bible, you might be thinking of a (thankfully) shorter in time Biblical justification used by some southern thinkers trying to respond. It was never dominant outside of its niche. Edit:again talking about a particularly American context | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany905 Posts
Just pathetic. Musk/Murdoch/Bezos/Koch... all the more reasons to "Tax the Rich" and tax their income. I think you should cap personal wealth at 1 billion just to break the influence the super rich start to exert at politics. Don't like a candidate? Find dirt on him and let FoxNews fire away (R. Murdoch on Vance, when not wanting the formerly elite-critizising hillbilly on the GOP ticket to WH ) Don't like getting taxed? Blow 45 Million (or 45/300,000s of your net worth) on Trump campaign (Musk) | ||
|
Vivax
21965 Posts
The democrats are heavily debating if they should find someone to sacrifice himself while taking a shot at Biden, unsure on whether to have him miss or not to gain ground in the PR value of their actions. The motto of the century is now ‘you miss every shot that isn’t fired at you’ | ||
|
SEB2610
59 Posts
On July 17 2024 16:14 WombaT wrote: I feel we just lack the language here, or at least the widespread adoption of language and concepts, so we end up in various daft scenarios like ‘define a woman’ thrown out as some kinda gotcha. Oddly enough rarely ‘define a man’, for whatever reason. On one far end of the scale no matter the evidence to the contrary some just refuse to recognise the biology/gender split, and thus the legitimacy of trans folk. On the other, people almost entirely discount the whole biological part of the equation. One can of course add specifiers such as biological or cis/trans to better clarify. I’m not the world’s foremost expert on the topic, I’ve read a bit around the place and some cultures have more fluid language for such things, and perhaps in a way that helps shape attitudes. Although sadly many of those cultures either don’t, or borderline don’t really exist anymore, certainly not enough to move the zeitgeist much. I imagine ‘define a woman’ is asked more commonly than ‘define a man’ because there isn’t much concern that women go into men’s bathrooms/compete in men’s sports etc whereas men claiming to be women have been causing trouble. | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom920 Posts
On July 17 2024 23:33 SEB2610 wrote: I imagine ‘define a woman’ is asked more commonly than ‘define a man’ because there isn’t much concern that women go into men’s bathrooms/compete in men’s sports etc whereas men claiming to be women have been causing trouble. Citation needed. | ||
|
SEB2610
59 Posts
I do in fact believe I can provide for you numerous examples of this: men claiming to be women wanting to and being allowed to enter the women’s sport category or convicted men claiming to be women wanting to and being allowed to serve time in women’s prisons etc But first, if you don’t mind, why don’t you clarify your own position here: do you believe there is a grand total of zero such cases or is your contention that such cases do occur but there’s nothing inappropriate going on? | ||
|
oBlade
United States5521 Posts
On July 17 2024 08:24 KwarK wrote: On an unrelated note I’m interested in seeing the results of the report into the SS failures that let the shooter take a shot. Apparently crowd members had reported seeing him there to law enforcement and looking at photos he’s extremely conspicuous there. Black clothes on a light roof. Someone really ought to lose their job over the shooter getting an opportunity to tease us like that. Now you have a small inkling of what conservatives must feel every time Biden suffers yet another assassination attempt from a flight of stairs, or the wind. | ||
KwarK
United States42518 Posts
On July 18 2024 01:13 oBlade wrote: Now you have a small inkling of what conservatives must feel every time Biden suffers yet another assassination attempt from a flight of stairs, or the wind. I don’t get it. What is it conservatives feel when Biden uses the stairs? I feel nothing, I’m not even monitoring Biden/stair interactions, I wasn’t aware that other people were. Where do you get your Biden wind news from? | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35131 Posts
On July 18 2024 01:02 SEB2610 wrote: I do in fact believe I can provide for you numerous examples of this: men claiming to be women wanting to and being allowed to enter the women’s sport category or convicted men claiming to be women wanting to and being allowed to serve time in women’s prisons etc But first, if you don’t mind, why don’t you clarify your own position here: do you believe there is a grand total of zero such cases or is your contention that such cases do occur but there’s nothing inappropriate going on? Are these men trying to abuse treating trans women well as a loophole, or actually trans women? | ||
|
KwarK
United States42518 Posts
It’s a tough one. I’d suspect, though I don’t have data to hand, that you’re going to have a bigger problem with trans men entering your assigned at birth bathrooms. If a bearded man comes into the woman’s bathrooms you’re going to struggle to tell whether they were born a woman, took a lot of testosterone, and are following strict conservative bathroom rules or whether they’re a man, not trans at all, but pretending to be a trans woman. In both cases they can have a beard. I guess there’s two approaches. You could institute genital inspections or you could use common sense. If someone claiming to be a trans woman who has made no effort to transition or pass as a woman enters the woman’s bathroom and assaults someone you could treat them as a man. Hell, the refusal to follow the signage isn’t really the issue there, you already got them on assault, the signage thing is someone moot. And if someone with breasts, long hair, wearing a dress enters the woman’s bathroom then it’s probably fine, regardless of their birth certificate. Though the odds are even more likely that when a bearded man enters then their kid just ran in and they’re getting them or that they went into the wrong room by accident. If there are cubicles then who even cares. Also regarding sports cis athletes can’t work out what the fuck the rules should be either. Human biology is super weird, people can have all sorts of mutations and maladjusted hormone levels. There are plenty of women who were born women and have XX chromosomes that aren’t allowed to compete freely too. Meanwhile Michael Phelps is half dolphin but is allowed because his mutations aren’t hormonal. The easiest answer to trans participation is simply to have them follow the same rules as cis athletes because cis athletes still get policed on all of this nonsense. The idea that it used to be simple but then trans people made it complicated is simply untrue, not all cis women are allowed to compete as women and so logically not all trans women would be allowed. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
SOOP
SHIN vs ByuN
HomeStory Cup
BSL: ProLeague
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
WardiTV European League
The PondCast
RSL Revival
WardiTV European League
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
