|
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 September 05 2026 23:54 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2026 15:11 Luolis wrote:On September 04 2026 18:06 Artesimo wrote:
Unless someone is malicious about it (changing their pronouns frequently just to annoy someone) it takes 0 effort and is exactly the same as when you have communication with someone only in writing and assume the wrong gender because they have a name that is gender neutral / usually for the other gender in your language. Unless you are a bit weird or there are some special circumstances you wouldn't deliberately misgender someone who's gender identity matches their sex either.
And with GreenHorizons you don't respect it just for their sake, but also for every other non binary person that might be reading, and to normalise it. I believe improving casual acceptance of nonbinary people is the way to erode the base for the fearmongering and instrumentalised hate and prejudice utilised by various political and ideological groups.
I would agree that it is a tragedy for the nonbinary community to have GreenHorizons be associated with them though.
EDIT: thanks for the correction DarkPlasmaBall Yeah pretty much nailed it on the head here. If someone is nonbinary and wants to be referred to with "they/them" pronouns, yeah you should just do that. Also someone said earlier something along the line that properly gendered pronouns are something of a sign of respect that you have to earn. I couldn't disagree more. Even if someone is a total piece of shit, you should respect their pronouns for the sake of other trans people who aren't pieces of shit. That is true, but in this case GH has not said GHs pronouns. Technically speaking I’m actually doing the correct thing not using pronouns because GH has not stated the ones he has preferred. GH is also partially at fault in this situation because it is customary to put your pronouns out there, if important to you in written communication because it is impossible to tell otherwise. It is not Kwarks fault for not seeing the “coming out”, and it wasn’t even clear. That people assumed GH wanted the plurals isn’t that awesome either because there is no hard and fast rule.
GH posted this a few months ago. Obviously, people may have missed this conversation or forgotten about it, but here's the information for you to consider moving forward:
On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well.Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer.
Unless there have been any more recent updates, it seems that GreenHorizons/GH/they/them is ideal.
|
On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread.
Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined.
EDIT: Sidenote on the liquipedia editing, you ever follow up on that Fleetfeet? I tried but turns out:
"Women's tournaments are tournaments that permit entry exclusively to women and girls, welcoming both cisgender and transgender participants" wasn't okay because "FIDE does not allow transgender players in women events" so instead it continues to say: "Female Only Tournaments are tournaments that only permit entry to female and/or female-identifying players." (which seems problematic to me).
So would: "Women Only Tournaments are tournaments that only permit entry to women and/or woman-identifying players." the best compromise?
Or maybe: "Women's Tournaments are open to all individuals who live and identify as women, welcoming both cisgender and transgender participants, except where restricted by international governing body regulations."
I should also add that I don't think this is a "major issue" in itself, just something that we have disproportionate influence on and ability to actually change (unlike far too much of US politics).
|
On September 06 2026 00:10 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2026 23:54 Billyboy wrote:On September 05 2026 15:11 Luolis wrote:On September 04 2026 18:06 Artesimo wrote:
Unless someone is malicious about it (changing their pronouns frequently just to annoy someone) it takes 0 effort and is exactly the same as when you have communication with someone only in writing and assume the wrong gender because they have a name that is gender neutral / usually for the other gender in your language. Unless you are a bit weird or there are some special circumstances you wouldn't deliberately misgender someone who's gender identity matches their sex either.
And with GreenHorizons you don't respect it just for their sake, but also for every other non binary person that might be reading, and to normalise it. I believe improving casual acceptance of nonbinary people is the way to erode the base for the fearmongering and instrumentalised hate and prejudice utilised by various political and ideological groups.
I would agree that it is a tragedy for the nonbinary community to have GreenHorizons be associated with them though.
EDIT: thanks for the correction DarkPlasmaBall Yeah pretty much nailed it on the head here. If someone is nonbinary and wants to be referred to with "they/them" pronouns, yeah you should just do that. Also someone said earlier something along the line that properly gendered pronouns are something of a sign of respect that you have to earn. I couldn't disagree more. Even if someone is a total piece of shit, you should respect their pronouns for the sake of other trans people who aren't pieces of shit. That is true, but in this case GH has not said GHs pronouns. Technically speaking I’m actually doing the correct thing not using pronouns because GH has not stated the ones he has preferred. GH is also partially at fault in this situation because it is customary to put your pronouns out there, if important to you in written communication because it is impossible to tell otherwise. It is not Kwarks fault for not seeing the “coming out”, and it wasn’t even clear. That people assumed GH wanted the plurals isn’t that awesome either because there is no hard and fast rule. GH posted this a few months ago. Obviously, people may have missed this conversation or forgotten about it, but here's the information for you to consider moving forward: Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well.Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Unless there have been any more recent updates, it seems that GreenHorizons/GH/they/them is ideal.
There you go. Hence why non binary people who are not looking for unneeded drama put it their sig for others. For GH pwning the libs is more important, and they love the drama and to get to correct people. So I’m not going to get remotely upset if mistakes happen, pretty sure that’s the hope.
|
On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined.
I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this:
I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread:
1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns;
2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns;
3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns;
4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns.
I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4.
*There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive).
|
On September 06 2026 00:21 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 00:10 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 05 2026 23:54 Billyboy wrote:On September 05 2026 15:11 Luolis wrote:On September 04 2026 18:06 Artesimo wrote:
Unless someone is malicious about it (changing their pronouns frequently just to annoy someone) it takes 0 effort and is exactly the same as when you have communication with someone only in writing and assume the wrong gender because they have a name that is gender neutral / usually for the other gender in your language. Unless you are a bit weird or there are some special circumstances you wouldn't deliberately misgender someone who's gender identity matches their sex either.
And with GreenHorizons you don't respect it just for their sake, but also for every other non binary person that might be reading, and to normalise it. I believe improving casual acceptance of nonbinary people is the way to erode the base for the fearmongering and instrumentalised hate and prejudice utilised by various political and ideological groups.
I would agree that it is a tragedy for the nonbinary community to have GreenHorizons be associated with them though.
EDIT: thanks for the correction DarkPlasmaBall Yeah pretty much nailed it on the head here. If someone is nonbinary and wants to be referred to with "they/them" pronouns, yeah you should just do that. Also someone said earlier something along the line that properly gendered pronouns are something of a sign of respect that you have to earn. I couldn't disagree more. Even if someone is a total piece of shit, you should respect their pronouns for the sake of other trans people who aren't pieces of shit. That is true, but in this case GH has not said GHs pronouns. Technically speaking I’m actually doing the correct thing not using pronouns because GH has not stated the ones he has preferred. GH is also partially at fault in this situation because it is customary to put your pronouns out there, if important to you in written communication because it is impossible to tell otherwise. It is not Kwarks fault for not seeing the “coming out”, and it wasn’t even clear. That people assumed GH wanted the plurals isn’t that awesome either because there is no hard and fast rule. GH posted this a few months ago. Obviously, people may have missed this conversation or forgotten about it, but here's the information for you to consider moving forward: On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well.Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Unless there have been any more recent updates, it seems that GreenHorizons/GH/they/them is ideal. There you go. Hence why non binary people who are not looking for unneeded drama put it their sig for others. For GH pwning the libs is more important, and they love the drama and to get to correct people. So I’m not going to get remotely upset if mistakes happen, pretty sure that’s the hope.
Sure, honest mistakes and a lack of helpful communication both happen all the time! Now that things are clearer, it's good to know that you're joining category #3 and not #4 (from my previous post) 
|
What do you mean by joining?
|
On September 06 2026 01:15 Billyboy wrote:
What do you mean by joining?
All I mean by that is that you just called GH by their preferred pronoun, as opposed to refusing to do so.
|
On September 06 2026 00:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined. I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this: I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread: 1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns; 2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns; 3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns; 4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns. I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4. *There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive).
It sounds true but incomplete? Part of the problem I predicted and we're seeing displayed is the hopeless parsing of whether someone is in 2/4 but masquerading as oblivious/accident prone 1/3's to be petty and poke.
There was also the more recent reference. The " what you allow around you" part was particularly noticeable during this whole thing. It's been fascinating to see you, Wombat, and others trying to tightrope your convictions with the in-group dynamics. I know it isn't easy to overcome the Asch effect (as many, including myself, have failed many times before) and I appreciate when anyone is able to.
|
On September 06 2026 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 00:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined. I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this: I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread: 1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns; 2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns; 3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns; 4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns. I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4. *There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive). It sounds true but incomplete? Part of the problem I predicted and we're seeing displayed is the hopeless parsing of whether someone is in 2/4 but masquerading as oblivious/accident prone 1/3's to be petty and poke. There was also the more recent reference. The " what you allow around you" part was particularly noticeable during this whole thing. It's been fascinating to see you, Wombat, and others trying to tightrope your convictions with the in-group dynamics. I know it isn't easy to overcome the Asch effect (as many, including myself, have failed many times before) and I appreciate when anyone is able to.
Sure, that's definitely a fair concern. That must be exhausting to worry about, too.
My understanding of the Asch effect is when someone knows a correct answer but changes their mind and picks a wrong answer because they notice that everyone else has picked that wrong answer. Conforming to the group, even when it's already known that the group is wrong. Like if someone asked me what 2+2 is, and I know the answer is 4, but I noticed that a whole bunch of my friends are saying that the answer is 7 for some reason so I join them in answering "7" instead of "4". Social pressures and whatnot. When you say that we're "trying to tightrope [our] convictions with the in-group dynamics", are you still referring to gender identity and preferred pronouns, or some other topic? (If I'm trying to apply the Asch effect to your preferred pronouns in this thread, then I feel like that's saying that I know you prefer they/them, but a whole bunch of other people are referring to you incorrectly, so I just give up on referring to you as they/them and I just repeat whatever incorrect labels other people are using for you?)
|
On September 06 2026 01:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:All I mean by that is that you just called GH by their preferred pronoun, as opposed to refusing to do so.
Which is something I never did.
I also think as long as GH, chooses to not put it out there via signature, you or anyone else that "corrects" someone who is not using GH's preferred is hurting not helping. These are the types of activities that create enemies not allies.
|
On September 06 2026 01:46 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 01:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 01:15 Billyboy wrote:
What do you mean by joining? All I mean by that is that you just called GH by their preferred pronoun, as opposed to refusing to do so. Which is something I never did. I also think as long as GH, chooses to not put it out there via signature, you or anyone else that "corrects" someone who is not using GH's preferred is hurting not helping. These are the types of activities that create enemies not allies.
Fleetfeet said to you "Speaking of ally, GH has previously mentioned that their pronouns are "they", presumably they/them/themselves/their etc. Not calling you out because I think you're intentionally being a shitter, just letting you know in case you missed it." I think Fleetfeet was just giving you a heads up as gently as possible, and even proactively offering that you surely weren't being malicious. Why do you think that hurts (not helps) or creates enemies (not allies)? Why would being informed of something like that - especially in such a tactful manner - be taken negatively instead of neutrally or positively?
|
Lol this entire conversation is complete horseshit. In the last presidential election, Kamala Harris took somewhere between a 5 and 10 points hit in the polls among independents because she refused to recant or mitigate her support for trans rights and trans healthcare. Donald Trump said one of his main priorities was to "stop transgender lunacy". So naturally if you actually cared about trans rights you wouldn't be going around calling them "Adolf Hitler" and "Adolf Hitler+" implying there's only a minuscule difference between them.
It's some kind of parody of leftists to express outrage over pronouns but be completely apathetic (and that's the best case scenario) about the actual destruction of trans rights. And I say that as someone that's been using they/them since before July.
As another reminder, when North Carolina implemented a transphobic bathroom law in March 2016, Barack Obama organized a massive interstate boycott of NC until they pulled the law. Guess which resident tankie said they regretted ever supporting Obama and they wished Hillary Clinton won? With allies like this, who needs enemies.
|
On September 06 2026 01:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2026 00:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined. I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this: I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread: 1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns; 2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns; 3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns; 4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns. I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4. *There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive). It sounds true but incomplete? Part of the problem I predicted and we're seeing displayed is the hopeless parsing of whether someone is in 2/4 but masquerading as oblivious/accident prone 1/3's to be petty and poke. There was also the more recent reference. The " what you allow around you" part was particularly noticeable during this whole thing. It's been fascinating to see you, Wombat, and others trying to tightrope your convictions with the in-group dynamics. I know it isn't easy to overcome the Asch effect (as many, including myself, have failed many times before) and I appreciate when anyone is able to. Sure, that's definitely a fair concern. That must be exhausting to worry about, too. My understanding of the Asch effect is when someone knows a correct answer but changes their mind and picks a wrong answer because they notice that everyone else has picked that wrong answer. Conforming to the group, even when it's already known that the group is wrong. Like if someone asked me what 2+2 is, and I know the answer is 4, but I noticed that a whole bunch of my friends are saying that the answer is 7 for some reason so I join them in answering "7" instead of "4". Social pressures and whatnot. When you say that we're "trying to tightrope [our] convictions with the in-group dynamics", are you still referring to gender identity and preferred pronouns, or some other topic? (If I'm trying to apply the Asch effect to your preferred pronouns in this thread, then I feel like that's saying that I know you prefer they/them, but a whole bunch of other people are referring to you incorrectly, so I just give up on referring to you as they/them and I just repeat whatever incorrect labels other people are using for you?)
Yeah, it (just misgendering in general) sorta came up at Queeraoke last night I recognized I'm enduring relatively lightwork so, but for the grace of God go I.
Understandably so, you're thinking a bit too literally/mathematically.
The Asch effect is why Wombat (who is ostensibly in group 1) read: On September 03 2026 09:29 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On September 03 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:
I see you've chosen the laughingstock route. Don't get mad when people refuse to engage with you when you consistently meltdown when pressed too closely 🤷 Quelle fucking surprise GH alienates another potential ally and doesn’t understand why Who could have fucking thunk it? Because his actual intentions are to make himself seem important not gain political allies or the bs revolution he knows nothing about. If it was not only would he act different, but protests and not supporting and using the king capitalists manipulation tool wouldn’t be too inconvenient for him. He’s full of shit, it’s too bad some people believed him, but it’s not a bad thing to be trusting.
And didn't address it.
It's also part of why people have allowed JimmiC/Billyboy to say unhinged things about me for years without correcting them like you just did here.
|
On September 06 2026 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 01:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2026 00:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined. I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this: I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread: 1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns; 2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns; 3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns; 4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns. I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4. *There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive). It sounds true but incomplete? Part of the problem I predicted and we're seeing displayed is the hopeless parsing of whether someone is in 2/4 but masquerading as oblivious/accident prone 1/3's to be petty and poke. There was also the more recent reference. The " what you allow around you" part was particularly noticeable during this whole thing. It's been fascinating to see you, Wombat, and others trying to tightrope your convictions with the in-group dynamics. I know it isn't easy to overcome the Asch effect (as many, including myself, have failed many times before) and I appreciate when anyone is able to. Sure, that's definitely a fair concern. That must be exhausting to worry about, too. My understanding of the Asch effect is when someone knows a correct answer but changes their mind and picks a wrong answer because they notice that everyone else has picked that wrong answer. Conforming to the group, even when it's already known that the group is wrong. Like if someone asked me what 2+2 is, and I know the answer is 4, but I noticed that a whole bunch of my friends are saying that the answer is 7 for some reason so I join them in answering "7" instead of "4". Social pressures and whatnot. When you say that we're "trying to tightrope [our] convictions with the in-group dynamics", are you still referring to gender identity and preferred pronouns, or some other topic? (If I'm trying to apply the Asch effect to your preferred pronouns in this thread, then I feel like that's saying that I know you prefer they/them, but a whole bunch of other people are referring to you incorrectly, so I just give up on referring to you as they/them and I just repeat whatever incorrect labels other people are using for you?) Yeah, it (just misgendering in general) sorta came up at Queeraoke last night I recognized I'm enduring relatively lightwork so, but for the grace of God go I. Understandably so, you're thinking a bit too literally/mathematically. The Asch effect is why Wombat (who is ostensibly in group 1) read: Show nested quote +On September 03 2026 09:29 Billyboy wrote:On September 03 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On September 03 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:
I see you've chosen the laughingstock route. Don't get mad when people refuse to engage with you when you consistently meltdown when pressed too closely 🤷 Quelle fucking surprise GH alienates another potential ally and doesn’t understand why Who could have fucking thunk it? Because his actual intentions are to make himself seem important not gain political allies or the bs revolution he knows nothing about. If it was not only would he act different, but protests and not supporting and using the king capitalists manipulation tool wouldn’t be too inconvenient for him. He’s full of shit, it’s too bad some people believed him, but it’s not a bad thing to be trusting. And didn't address it. It's also part of why people have allowed JimmiC/Billyboy to say unhinged things about me for years without correcting them like you just did here.
Ah okay, thanks for the clarification.
|
On September 06 2026 01:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 01:46 Billyboy wrote:On September 06 2026 01:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 01:15 Billyboy wrote:
What do you mean by joining? All I mean by that is that you just called GH by their preferred pronoun, as opposed to refusing to do so. Which is something I never did. I also think as long as GH, chooses to not put it out there via signature, you or anyone else that "corrects" someone who is not using GH's preferred is hurting not helping. These are the types of activities that create enemies not allies. Fleetfeet said to you "Speaking of ally, GH has previously mentioned that their pronouns are "they", presumably they/them/themselves/their etc. Not calling you out because I think you're intentionally being a shitter, just letting you know in case you missed it." I think Fleetfeet was just giving you a heads up as gently as possible, and even proactively offering that you surely weren't being malicious. Why do you think that hurts (not helps) or creates enemies (not allies)? Why would being informed of something like that - especially in such a tactful manner - be taken negatively instead of neutrally or positively?
LS is giving you a good set of reasons why. And given GHs history what do you think GHs intentions are? Why won’t GH put it in his sig, instead of of GHs sweet own the lib current one? What actually matters to GH.
Since you don’t seem shy on giving advice let me give you some, because it is extremely painful to watch your continuous interactions with GH, it feels like watching an emotionally abusive relationship. GHs questions for you are are never legitimate, GH does not care about what you think and never has. It will either be to set you you up for whatever burn he wants to land or as a disingenuous lead to bring you to his conclusion. And at some point in the conversation you realize this and get upset.
Save yourself the pain and the rest of the bad feels and just don’t interact with GH, or at the very least ask a question yourself and don’t move on to Gags next step until he answers you directly. Care about yourself and don’t let GH keep making you a victim, it sucks to watch.
|
On September 06 2026 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 01:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2026 00:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined. I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this: I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread: 1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns; 2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns; 3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns; 4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns. I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4. *There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive). It sounds true but incomplete? Part of the problem I predicted and we're seeing displayed is the hopeless parsing of whether someone is in 2/4 but masquerading as oblivious/accident prone 1/3's to be petty and poke. There was also the more recent reference. The " what you allow around you" part was particularly noticeable during this whole thing. It's been fascinating to see you, Wombat, and others trying to tightrope your convictions with the in-group dynamics. I know it isn't easy to overcome the Asch effect (as many, including myself, have failed many times before) and I appreciate when anyone is able to. Sure, that's definitely a fair concern. That must be exhausting to worry about, too. My understanding of the Asch effect is when someone knows a correct answer but changes their mind and picks a wrong answer because they notice that everyone else has picked that wrong answer. Conforming to the group, even when it's already known that the group is wrong. Like if someone asked me what 2+2 is, and I know the answer is 4, but I noticed that a whole bunch of my friends are saying that the answer is 7 for some reason so I join them in answering "7" instead of "4". Social pressures and whatnot. When you say that we're "trying to tightrope [our] convictions with the in-group dynamics", are you still referring to gender identity and preferred pronouns, or some other topic? (If I'm trying to apply the Asch effect to your preferred pronouns in this thread, then I feel like that's saying that I know you prefer they/them, but a whole bunch of other people are referring to you incorrectly, so I just give up on referring to you as they/them and I just repeat whatever incorrect labels other people are using for you?) Yeah, it (just misgendering in general) sorta came up at Queeraoke last night I recognized I'm enduring relatively lightwork so, but for the grace of God go I. Understandably so, you're thinking a bit too literally/mathematically. The Asch effect is why Wombat (who is ostensibly in group 1) read: Show nested quote +On September 03 2026 09:29 Billyboy wrote:On September 03 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On September 03 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:
I see you've chosen the laughingstock route. Don't get mad when people refuse to engage with you when you consistently meltdown when pressed too closely 🤷 Quelle fucking surprise GH alienates another potential ally and doesn’t understand why Who could have fucking thunk it? Because his actual intentions are to make himself seem important not gain political allies or the bs revolution he knows nothing about. If it was not only would he act different, but protests and not supporting and using the king capitalists manipulation tool wouldn’t be too inconvenient for him. He’s full of shit, it’s too bad some people believed him, but it’s not a bad thing to be trusting. And didn't address it. It's also part of why people have allowed JimmiC/Billyboy to say unhinged things about me for years without correcting them like you just did here.
OMG, misnaming me on purpose. You monster.
So full of shit.
|
On September 05 2026 23:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2026 23:43 dyhb wrote:On September 05 2026 21:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Trump is trying to shrug off his illegal war and the damage it's done to the United States: What to know about the Iran war today:
- President Trump called the war with Iran "small potatoes" and defended his vice president, who said Thursday it shouldn't be called a war, saying, "A lot of people don't call it a war. I call it a military conflict."
- U.S. gas prices surged ahead of Labor Day weekend, with diesel hitting a record $5.85 a gallon Friday and AAA predicting travelers will face the highest prices ever seen over the holiday weekend.
- Despite President Trump insisting the amount of oil flowing out of the Persian Gulf has rebounded, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remains well below pre-war levels. Shipping data firm Lloyd's showed 102 ships transited the waterway last week, compared with 126 the week before — and that's compared with pre-war levels of at least 130 tankers daily.
Updated on: September 5, 2026 / 3:28 AM EDT / CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/iran-war-us-trump-diesel-gas-prices-labor-day/ Can you still view the ship data week by week compared to prewar on that link? Not in that news article link, but I think this website might be what you're looking for? https://www.lloydslist.com/hot-topics/strait-of-hormuz-crisis/spotlight-data Not seeing those specific numbers on Lloyd's, but maybe it was updated after the non-article was first published. The only 102 I see is a monthly total of bulk carrier.
|
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
I’d somewhat disagree with that characterisation of me and the Arsch effect, indeed I’d say your talking out of your Arsch there
|
On September 06 2026 02:26 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2026 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2026 01:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2026 00:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 06 2026 00:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. Yeah, this went about as well as I imagined. I can't relate to being in your position right now, but please let me know what you think about this: I feel like there are currently four* hypothetical categories of readers/posters here, especially since not everyone reads every page in this thread: 1. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, and are trying to honor your preferred pronouns; 2. Those of us who had read that July conversation and became aware that you prefer they/them, but are not interested in honoring your preferred pronouns; 3. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, and from now on will make an effort to honor your preferred pronouns; 4. Those who were unaware of your preferred pronouns up until now, but still don't care and won't honor your preferred pronouns. I've thankfully seen a lot more people in #1 than in #2, and I hope that those who are just now learning of your preferred pronouns choose #3 over #4. *There are surely other occasional lurkers or future posters that will miss both July's and today's conversation, so they might incorrectly assume the wrong pronouns. And then we'll educate them again, and hopefully they'll choose new category #5 (being supportive) over new category #6 (not being supportive). It sounds true but incomplete? Part of the problem I predicted and we're seeing displayed is the hopeless parsing of whether someone is in 2/4 but masquerading as oblivious/accident prone 1/3's to be petty and poke. There was also the more recent reference. The " what you allow around you" part was particularly noticeable during this whole thing. It's been fascinating to see you, Wombat, and others trying to tightrope your convictions with the in-group dynamics. I know it isn't easy to overcome the Asch effect (as many, including myself, have failed many times before) and I appreciate when anyone is able to. Sure, that's definitely a fair concern. That must be exhausting to worry about, too. My understanding of the Asch effect is when someone knows a correct answer but changes their mind and picks a wrong answer because they notice that everyone else has picked that wrong answer. Conforming to the group, even when it's already known that the group is wrong. Like if someone asked me what 2+2 is, and I know the answer is 4, but I noticed that a whole bunch of my friends are saying that the answer is 7 for some reason so I join them in answering "7" instead of "4". Social pressures and whatnot. When you say that we're "trying to tightrope [our] convictions with the in-group dynamics", are you still referring to gender identity and preferred pronouns, or some other topic? (If I'm trying to apply the Asch effect to your preferred pronouns in this thread, then I feel like that's saying that I know you prefer they/them, but a whole bunch of other people are referring to you incorrectly, so I just give up on referring to you as they/them and I just repeat whatever incorrect labels other people are using for you?) Yeah, it (just misgendering in general) sorta came up at Queeraoke last night I recognized I'm enduring relatively lightwork so, but for the grace of God go I. Understandably so, you're thinking a bit too literally/mathematically. The Asch effect is why Wombat (who is ostensibly in group 1) read: On September 03 2026 09:29 Billyboy wrote:On September 03 2026 09:24 WombaT wrote:On September 03 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:
I see you've chosen the laughingstock route. Don't get mad when people refuse to engage with you when you consistently meltdown when pressed too closely 🤷 Quelle fucking surprise GH alienates another potential ally and doesn’t understand why Who could have fucking thunk it? Because his actual intentions are to make himself seem important not gain political allies or the bs revolution he knows nothing about. If it was not only would he act different, but protests and not supporting and using the king capitalists manipulation tool wouldn’t be too inconvenient for him. He’s full of shit, it’s too bad some people believed him, but it’s not a bad thing to be trusting. And didn't address it. It's also part of why people have allowed JimmiC/Billyboy to say unhinged things about me for years without correcting them like you just did here. I’d somewhat disagree with that characterisation of me and the Arsch effect, indeed I’d say your talking out of your Arsch there
Asch* What's your understanding of why?
|
Namedropping authors or terms GH doesn't understand is their signature move. Like when they reference MLK Jr.'s comment about "white liberals", which was originally about voter suppression, to encourage people not to vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
