Lol I'm just messing with you, there is literally no right answer here, because the list of genders gets longer everyday. You could say 50 and by the time you're done saying the word fifty there would be 10 new genders.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
I'm all about maximum freedom for all individuals as long as that freedom does not result in physical or direct financial harm (you lost your job because you got depressed because people called you names: not gonna fly- that's why I use the word "direct" which implies theft or burglery).
That means a person can choose to identify as 14 different simultaneous genders while I have the right to call them a complete f*cking moron and all of our freedom to do so is protected by the state.
As for trying to play gotcha games and word games to flesh out the nuance of this position: f*ck off. I don't want to play those games. Figure out the nuance on your own. (I would be more polite but you're clearly a troll with ill intentions so you don't deserve my love)
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
These statements are cringe on and by themselves, but the fact that some of them are about st0opid 'murican crap and they are side by side some of the biggest ethical challenges that have been faced by humankind makes it even more cringe.
10/10 well thought out criticism. Totally not a vague gripe that is not at all constructive.
Newsflash: The vast majority of people on these boards are Americans. It would be stupid not to include some American-themed statements with this in mind.
Yes, because the statements were chosen at random, which means they will naturally vary wildly in terms of topic and importance.
I'm weighting whether it is worth it to actually reply to your observations. I guess it makes more sense to elaborate on my criticism.
My gripe with mass media is that they control the flow of information and the topics that get discussed disregarding their importance and limiting the scope of answers that can be given to each topic. In my humble opinion, these statements are an excellent example of everything I find lacking in mass media and my expectation when discussing in a forum where actual people share information is not to fall into those holes.
Is it wrong for me to expect better? Probably. If my original reply came out as offensive it's because of this. I did not intend it to be a personal attack against you.
1) Agree, though AF is better in theory than in practice, it has problems itself
2) Agree, though there these need to be sensible
3) Disagree
4) Somewhat agree
5) Disagree
6) Agreed, though the use of "taxes to remedy" can be troublesome
7) Agreed, but it should be fines
8) Disagree
9) Agreed, but it has to be if they're capable. eg You're unemployed because you're a lazy stoner leeching off the system and living off his brother's kindness, sure. You're unemployed because you lost both arms and legs, you get a pass
10) Disagree
11) Disagree
12) Overall agree
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Okay, that all seems reasonable. Although I should say that there is nothing stopping anyone here from adding additional depth to their answers, broadening the discussion, or challenging the premises of these statements if they deem it necessary. I understand your concerns about mass media, but this is an open forum and not really a comparable environment at all. No flow of information is being restricted here. If you do have something to say, then you can say it freely without censorship. And if you think the discourse is too narrow, then you can add your own opinion and change that.
Mostly disagree. I would agree to some mild affirmative action if carefully calibrated, but do not trust institutions to calibrate it properly.
Disagree if you're referring to reparations, though obviously efforts should be made to ensure any past unethical activity doesn't continue to the present. I am OK with reparations for more recent activities, e.g. for Japanese Americans who were in internment camps.
Agree as a general trend.
Disagree, but factory farming is morally problematic.
"Some"? Sure.
Agree, though expanded nuclear energy could have done a lot for us.
Only if it's actually the result of gender discrimination, and the government is horrible at determining this.
Not sure.
Disagree, but making it a condition for welfare is OK.
I mean probably by some margin.
Disagree.
Not sure.
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
I agree with your gripe about mass media, and share your reservations.
But my real disappointment is with social activists limited vision and scope.
For example, if I was a promoter of civil rights, I certainly wouldn't feel an obligation to actively work towards the rights of Native Americans. But I WOULD live under an assumption that many of the people I'm reaching out to are not African American, and thus would be very sensitive to condescendtion of "the other", as I myself am an "other" to those I plead my case for.
It would be hypocritical of me to turn an "other" who happens to not be my "other" into a doormat or a joke.
Yet, that's exactly what activists do. Feminists have no problem looking down their noses at skinny people, while defending obese people. Liberals have no problem mocking someone on grounds other then the very narrow, specific groups they protect.
And I realize many on the left believe in relative terms.. If the media helps us with Nixon, they are our friend. If they are smearing us, they are our enemy. If you punch down at victims, it's bad. If you punch up at privileged, it's fine.
All just a way to rationalize anything that is good or bad for us, on a personal level. Without standards, standards are whatever happens to annoy you in the moment.
That's the ethics of a child, not an adult with a very real concern for other adults.. (Or who plead for other adults to have concern for them and theirs..)
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
KMC Community Forums
Jan 8th, 2018 01:31 PM
