EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5954
| 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 | ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2952 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany12059 Posts
On September 09 2026 17:58 EnDeR_ wrote: Right, we definitely needed a "what is the definition of a man" 5-page discussion for the 4th time I think the last time it was "What is the definitions of a woman????", so there is some variance here! | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany628 Posts
On September 09 2026 16:50 dyhb wrote: I've made several posts trying to understand your perspective and trying to understand DPB's, but the only thing that made sense is the kinds of people that ask "What is a man" don't know enough about biology or intersex to answer "What is a male." That part makes sense. The rest makes less sense. No, you tried to find a way where you could either match what I said and your initial response with something where you either did not fail to understand what DarkPlasmaBall wrote to begin with, or to communicate what part of what he wrote you took issue with. At least that is the most charitable way I can read this interaction. Your last 2 posts are a great example of what you could have led with if you either understood the conversation you are in, or were capable of/interested in communicating it without someone nudging you along. And you still seem to fail to understand my role in this exchange since you seem to read it as a defence of DarkPlasmaBall's point, which it is not. You had the assignment of discussing his thesis, I was the headteacher that handed you back your assignment and told you to "try again" because your argumentation failed the criteria for the assignment with no consideration for the conclusion. DarkPlasmaBall: A is B, therefore B has all of A. You: How does B have all of A??? Me: You have to question why A should be B (which you did later down the line, but while trying to argue that really that was included in your questioning of how B should have all of A, which is why you got another failing grade). With your last posts you outlined your belief system, thus gave opportunity to see where they might be incompatible, and how that shapes your argument, and where it might be incompatible with DarkPlasmaBall's. You are now finally in a position where you can argue your point logically without making a fool of yourself. Before you moved in a logical construct that isn't supportive of your ideas, while pretending that you weren't. And again, at no point was there any gotcha on my part because I basically just commented on what went down and where you went wrong, with the only trick on my part being to trust you to shoot yourself in the foot. I also don't think it would be fair to characterise any of what DarkPlasmaBall wrote as an attempted gotcha either. Again, I don't know him, can't read their mind, and all that, but they way they express themselves reads much more like "here is how I feel about this and why" less than a "first and foremost let me prove why you are wrong". Basically if you had led with what you arrived at in the end I would not have had anything to entertain myself with. Hope that helps you trying to understand "my perspective". I am the asshole who is calling the technical fouls. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18476 Posts
On September 09 2026 16:53 Dan HH wrote: It is baffling, it's not purely singular. I'm sure you can agree "They likes to present themselves" sounds completely wrong, you have to drop the s and use like as if the "they" were plural even though it's not. It's probably why people invented ze and other neo-pronouns, but they are worse. That said, gendered languages don't have a solution either. They don't have gender-neutral pronouns for people (just for objects, the equivalent of "it") and maybe worse, default to masculine for any heterogeneous group of people (amigos, compañeros, ... can include women, but amigas and compañeras cannot include men). German is basically the same, but has the advantage of having a neutral gender, and all genders use the same plural declension, so die Freunde can be a group of men, women or mixed with no grammatical change. But there's no way of referring to a person as gender-neutral in any language that I know of. Someone is a he/him or a she/her in all languages unless you use neo-pronouns. So it's a gap. And filling the gap with something new is going to sound profoundly weird until you start getting used to it and it isn't weird anymore. Whether that's they/them, ze/zir (considerably worse than they/them, imho) or in Spanish elle, compañeres or god forbid, compañer@s. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46584 Posts
On September 09 2026 17:58 EnDeR_ wrote: Right, we definitely needed a "what is the definition of a man" 5-page discussion for the 4th time My bigger issue is that ETisME asked the question, but didn't participate in any of the actual discussion. | ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2952 Posts
| ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3414 Posts
On September 09 2026 16:53 Dan HH wrote: It is baffling, it's not purely singular. I'm sure you can agree "They likes to present themselves" sounds completely wrong, you have to drop the s and use like as if the "they" were plural even though it's not. That's not linguistically unusual. For example, in German the pronoun "Sie" can be both second person (formal) singular and third person plural, but its associated conjugated verbs use the third person plural form in both cases, e.g. "Sie haben eine Katze" = "They have a cat" or "You have a cat". (And it can also be third person singular feminine, but conjugations do change in that case: "sie hat eine Katze".) I mean I can see a new learner getting tripped up by this kind of thing, but I wouldn't expect people at a linguistics department to find it a big deal, especially since there's much weirder and more illogical stuff in English. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24419 Posts
On September 09 2026 08:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: Not sure I'm missing a left handed joke or not but no. No, it was about "they" ironically coming to English from old Norse. | ||
|
Billyboy
2609 Posts
On September 09 2026 14:25 Fleetfeet wrote: I'm going to take a deep breath and give you a chance. Have you googled "Are gaming spaces hostile for women?" ? You identify as an ally. I presume you understand, generally, that gaming spaces are an example of a space where women are not as readily welcomed as men. That shouldn't be news to you. If you haven't heard it from women in your life who play games and are less comfortable playing them online / are reluctant to correct people regarding gender in gaming spaces, then I hope you would have at least seen and recognized it in your own experiences while gaming. You're correct that intent matters, though I'd contest that it's ALL that matters. If we, for example, went to a restaurant where the default was for all the staff and servers to refer to everyone as "girl", I assume we both would be mildly uncomfortable with that. Nothing crazy, just think it's kinda strange. They don't intend to misgender us because they're malicious - it's just what they do there. You could also argue that we opt in to it, because we could just choose to not go there. ...But what if they made the best goddamn pancakes in the world, and if we wanted to go there for those pancakes, we had to just accept the discomfort of being misgendered? And maybe it's not uncomfortable for you. Maybe they also have a valid reason for calling everyone "girl". That's all fine - what I'm trying to illustrate is that for non-males in gaming spaces it's like us in that restaurant... except instead of just the staff, it's -everyone- who calls each other girl, because girl is the default. And if it's uncomfortable for you and you say "Actually I'm a boy", there's a very good chance you just get called 'cock' or 'dickhead' instead of girl now. As a participant in that, why the fuck WOULDN'T you gravitate towards calling people "them" or "*character they're playing*" or "person" until you know their actual gender/pronouns, to avoid making people uncomfortable for no reason? So your plan was to take a deep breath, ignore everything I said, make a bunch of super negative presumptions and then write a passive aggressive post. This is why I called you performative. That post is in no way written to convince me. It is written to make me the bad guy and you the good guy. Of course I know it’s hostile. I said that,if you actually bothered to read and understand what I wrote, or looked into the research on why many women are not only OK with it but prefer it, the internet being hostile to women. It’s often number one and always top 3. You desperately need a reality check because pretending like you are on 4 chan and dealing with a bunch of beta wanna be alpha males is stupid. This is one of the least hostile places on the internet. Hell it’s one of the only communities where a very out trans women is not only accepted but celebrated. Even with GHs swap , you have one of the most disliked posters and still Gah getting the pronouns of preference is probably at close to 98%. That you somehow think it should be instantly 100 is ridiculous. Brains don’t work that way, changing an over decade habit with no clues is not easy. And on top of that, your “policing” is not even fair, you are missing some. The non bad actors are not having this discussion to be mean to anyone. They are trying to figure out how to the right thing, and why it’s the right thing, so in their far more important real life interactions they can feel good about what they do. It is also a very new thing that a lot of people don’t have much experience with and this should be a safe place to discuss it. Here we have anonymity which can allow extra openness if others are not attacking. Drone and others have posed some really interesting questions, that if you actually were super informed and really wanted to help you could have engaged with. We have some very thoughtful smart people from all over the world a walks of life that can (ever more less frequently) have some really interesting and impactful discussions. It is not wrong or hateful to try to put some critical thinking and effort into a complex situation, it is actually really respectful and informative. There are two ways to derail these. There is the hateful people actively trying to increase hate and then there are those that attack anything outside of what they have determined as the most possible progressive position to make themselves feel good. Your current path is going to be GH and you are going to create as many allies for your position as GH has for GHs version of revolutionary socialism. | ||
|
Billyboy
2609 Posts
On September 09 2026 17:41 Velr wrote: I feel like native english or other non-gendered language speakers have a hard time understanding just how bad "they/them" feels to people coming from gendered languages. My mind jumps to two things when I hear "they/them", one is utterly dehumanising on the level of calling groups of people animal names, actually even worse. The other is the "royal" we, which also feels horribly wrong for the opposite reason. I don't claim either of these is "correct", it's just how it feels to me and I would guess many others with similar language background. To this point, the use of they/them can be (and often is) just as disrespectful and hateful as he/him. It comes down to tone and intention. In written word the actual tone and intent are near impossible to determine. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46584 Posts
On September 09 2026 22:25 Billyboy wrote: To this point, the use of they/them can be (and often is) just as disrespectful and hateful as he/him. It comes down to tone and intention. In written word the actual tone and intent are near impossible to determine. Do you mean that you've experienced situations where a disrespectful person will maliciously call someone they/them when it's already been established that the person prefers he/him or she/her? I'm well aware of the opposite - someone prefers they/them but a disrespectful person basically says "No, I'm calling you the stereotypical pronouns of either he/him or she/her - whichever I personally think fits you best" - but I haven't heard of someone hatefully whipping out they/them to purposely undermine a preference for traditional binary pronouns. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3414 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10978 Posts
On September 09 2026 23:39 LightSpectra wrote: I guarantee you there are more people who will be offended if you default to he/him when the gender of a person is unknown or irrelevant than people who will be offended if you default to they/them. In person?! If so I would highly doubt that. | ||
KwarK
United States44398 Posts
On September 09 2026 04:21 Introvert wrote: My point was that they are not interchangeable. Sure most of the universe is He and H but when we talked about the other 1% we give them their own names based on solid definitions, we don't call Helium "trans Hydrogen" The outliers shouldn’t be involved in sports. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3414 Posts
On September 10 2026 00:01 Velr wrote: In person?! If so I would highly doubt that. Realistically how often do you think something like the following is going to happen, online or in real life: "Oh, you're a pilot? My friend Sasha always wanted to fly a plane." "Have they looked into enrolling in a flight academy?" "What? Fuck you, Sasha is a boy, how dare you?" | ||
|
Billyboy
2609 Posts
On September 09 2026 22:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Do you mean that you've experienced situations where a disrespectful person will maliciously call someone they/them when it's already been established that the person prefers he/him or she/her? I'm well aware of the opposite - someone prefers they/them but a disrespectful person basically says "No, I'm calling you the stereotypical pronouns of either he/him or she/her - whichever I personally think fits you best" - but I haven't heard of someone hatefully whipping out they/them to purposely undermine a preference for traditional binary pronouns. No I mean they will add an over the top sarcastic to they or them. Or call one of their buddies they or them when they wear a pink shirt or whatever. There is no perfect word to stop assholes, it’s dumb to try. In fact, it often just creates new ways to be an ass. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On September 09 2026 22:25 Billyboy wrote: To this point, the use of they/them can be (and often is) just as disrespectful and hateful as he/him. It comes down to tone and intention. In written word the actual tone and intent are near impossible to determine. It’s fine as a default, we kinda assume most people on TL are male and tend to act accordingly, I know I do, accurately but there’s nout wrong with being neutral about it Some people can be wankers about it, I had a colleague in college insisting on correct pronouns while studiously never getting my bloody name right (my given name is my middle name) But like, whatever. It’s really neither a difficult adjustment, nor a massive imposition if people request it, I don’t see why this is controversial If people prefer they/them, one can presuppose that they don’t find it dehumanising, which is all that matters really | ||
|
Billyboy
2609 Posts
On September 09 2026 23:39 LightSpectra wrote: I guarantee you there are more people who will be offended if you default to he/him when the gender of a person is unknown or irrelevant than people who will be offended if you default to they/them. I don’t know that’s true. There are plenty of men who get super offended when you assume they are gay, trans, or non binary. Same with women. You can say that’s wrong, but it doesn’t change the reality. And I’m not sure why it is wrong for a man or woman to feel like their gender identity is important but OK for a non binary to think their gender identity is important. The reality is there is no system that takes away mistakes, or abuse. Attacking those who are just making mistakes doesn’t correct any sort of behaviour, it sends people in the opposite direction. There is a reason so many young men are turning to the populist right, algorithms and shit are most certainly a factor. But the behaviour of attacking people to show how progressive one is, is not helping. No ally has ever been built in this way, many enemies have been created. The reason universities create so many open people is not because the left is infecting them with the woke mind virus. But people get to actually know real people of various backgrounds and find out they are actually quite awesome, vs their online experience (or local experience where they might not meet anyone or have one not good experience) online of being attacked and belittled if they are not perfect with whatever is the latest progressive take. | ||
|
Billyboy
2609 Posts
On September 10 2026 00:49 WombaT wrote: It’s fine as a default, we kinda assume most people on TL are male and tend to act accordingly, I know I do, accurately but there’s nout wrong with being neutral about it Some people can be wankers about it, I had a colleague in college insisting on correct pronouns while studiously never getting my bloody name right (my given name is my middle name) But like, whatever. It’s really neither a difficult adjustment, nor a massive imposition if people request it, I don’t see why this is controversial If people prefer they/them, one can presuppose that they don’t find it dehumanising, which is all that matters really Of course you should call individuals whatever they want to be called, that’s a small act of kindness and basic politeness. My point is that if you switch to they them as a default, you are not going to offend no one. I have a friend who has been accused of being gay his whole life, it’s a trigger for him because he is not. So when people walk up to him with they-them and he corrects them and they give him the patronizing, aww your gay but scared look it sets him off. And the way numbers work is if there are 10000 men and 10 non binary, if you offend 2 % with the they and 80% with the he, you are still upsetting more with the they. (Made up numbers to illustrate a point). The reality is there is no perfect answer and constantly judging others as not as “progressive” or “left” of you (not saying you do this, because you don’t) is all about the person doing its ego and not making things better. Hell it’s even in the word , progress is not about perfection it is about making things better. Trying to better and learn how to improve. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3414 Posts
On September 10 2026 00:50 Billyboy wrote: I don’t know that’s true. There are plenty of men who get super offended when you assume they are gay, trans, or non binary. Same with women. You can say that’s wrong, but it doesn’t change the reality. And I’m not sure why it is wrong for a man or woman to feel like their gender identity is important but OK for a non binary to think their gender identity is important. There must be some miscommunication here because defaulting to a genderless pronoun when you don't know how to refer to someone in the third person isn't disrespecting any men or women. The previous default before grammar pedants stopped correcting people for singular they/them was to say "one" (e.g. "one should keep in mind..."), and the default before that was to use he/him generically. | ||
| ||
