╌>

Why The Redefinition Of The Word 'Woman' Matters

  
Via:  Vic Eldred  •  2 years ago  •  268 comments

By:   David Harsanyi (The Federalist)

Why The Redefinition Of The Word 'Woman' Matters
Until 2022, the word 'woman' was defined as, 'An adult female human being' in the Cambridge Dictionary. Then quackery took over.

Leave a comment to auto-join group Americana

Americana


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Samuel Johnson's "Dictionary of the English Language," first published in 1755, defines the word "woman" as, "The female of the human race." And until October of 2022, the word "woman" was still defined as, "An adult female human being" in the Cambridge Dictionary. What transpired on the topic during the intervening 267 years? Not much. Science confirmed what men and women have known since Adam and Eve began talking past each other — not only do the sexes have immutable physiological differences, down to their genetic matter, but they observe, act, and think differently as well.

Yet Cambridge now says the definition of woman is, "An adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth" (and the definition of a "man" is someone who "identifies as male though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.") How does one use "woman" in a sentence? One of Cambridge's examples is, "Mary is a woman who was assigned male at birth." Who assigned Mary's sex? Her parents? God? Evolution? The SRY gene? And what other human characteristics does Cambridge believe can be altered according to one's feelings? Lexicographers have a responsibility to offer clarity and accuracy — which is, of course, impossible in this case.

When asked about the change, Sophie White, a spokeswoman from Cambridge University Press, told The Washington Post that the editors had "carefully studied usage patterns of the word woman and concluded that this definition is one that learners of English should be aware of to support their understanding of how the language is used." This is tautological gibberish. Though, in fairness to White, "Wokeish" is a relatively new language.

The Post, for instance, claims Cambridge updated its definitions for "woman" and "man" "to include transgender people." (Incredulous italics mine.) This also makes zero sense. If Cambridge changed the definition of "black" or "Caucasian" to incorporate "Asian people," it would not be including a new group, it would be altering the fundamental facts of what makes someone black or white or Asian. "Woman" is not a neologism. Our understanding of "woman" hasn't been altered by new scientific discoveries. Nothing has changed.

As hard as I try, it is difficult not to bring up Orwell these days. In "Politics and the English Language," Orwell notes that the "struggle against the abuse of language" is often treated as a "sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hansom cabs to aeroplanes." But how can we deny that ideas are corrupting language, and language is corrupting thought?

At first, these liturgic declarations of one's "pronouns" seemed relatively harmless to me. And, not that it matters much, but I've been perfectly willing to refer to adults in whatever manner they desire. It's a free country. Pursue your happiness. It's not like gender-bending is some new idea. In my real-world experience, I find that most people try to be courteous.

It's one thing to be considerate and another to be bullied into an alternative reality. But that's where we are right now. Placating the mob has led to the rise in dangerous euphemisms like "gender-affirming care," a phrase that means the exact opposite of what it claims. In today's world, "gender-affirming therapy" means telling a girl she can be transformed into a boy, but "conversion therapy" means telling a girl she's a girl. The corruption of reality has led to the rise of a pseudoscientific cult that performs irreparable mutilation on kids, with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and life-altering surgeries.

And in their never-ending campaign to smear political opponents, Democrats have latched onto this idea as if it were a universal truth. If a person contends that gender is an unalterable feature of human life these days — a belief shared by all of civilization until about five minutes ago — they might as well be Bull Connor holding a firehose. Only this week, after signing the same-sex marriage bill, our octogenarian president claimed:


We need to challenge the hundreds of callous and cynical laws introduced in the states targeting transgender children, terrifying families and criminalizing doctors who give children the care they need. And we have to protect these children so they know they are loved and that we will stand up for them and so they can seek for themselves.

Speaking of cynical. Does the president really believe these troubled teenagers "need" mastectomies, facial surgery, and genital removal to feel loved? Or would it be more prudent to let them wait for adulthood to make life-altering surgical decisions? Has anyone ever asked him? Biden is, of course, right that Americans should be free from threats of violence. That includes kids who are now subjected to abuse at the hands of people who have adopted this trendy quackery.

I simply refuse to accept that most Americans, or even more than a small percentage, believe children or should be empowered to "choose" their sex. Rather, in their well-intentioned effort to embrace inclusivity — and avoid being called bigots — they've allowed extremists to, among many other things, circumvent debate by corroding fundamental truths about the world. And that's what these dictionaries — once a place we collectively went for definitions and etymologies — have shamefully helped them do.


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 years ago

Even the Cambridge Dictionary has bowed to the radical left.

It is an age of insanity.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 years ago

sane folks, normal folks, chose to evolve and move forward instead of regressing

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @1.1    2 years ago

Not one thing regressive about calling males males or females females!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.1    2 years ago

It's amazing what lengths these nimrods go to in order to force others to play a role in their mental illness.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.1.3  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.1    2 years ago

“Not one thing regressive about calling males males or females females!”

Again, how does one (total strangers mind you) looking for  their own identity, pronoun and more importantly, acceptance, affect you in any way? 

Unless, of course, you choose to relate it to your misguided proprietary societal concerns. That being the case, you’ve already lost… for that kind of thinking (rather opinion) is indeed nothing but regressive. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.1.3    2 years ago

I didn't say it affected me in any way. Pay attention. Me calling people what they are shouldn't be a problem, but it sure seems like it is for some!

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.1.5  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.4    2 years ago

“Me calling people what they are shouldn't be a problem,”

None of your business. None of your concern. Case closed. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.1.5    2 years ago

Sorry if calling a male a male is offensive to you. [deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.8  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @1.1.3    2 years ago
Again, how does one (total strangers mind you) looking for  their own identity

For the most part we are talking about children being nudged along by progressives, often without the knowledge or consent of parents. Later it is they who pay the consequences for a rash immature decision.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
1.1.9  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.8    2 years ago
we are talking about children being nudged along by progressives, often without the knowledge or consent of parents. Later it is they who pay the consequences for a rash immature decision.

One of the (many) steps toward Marxism is for school radicals to slowly brainwash their students into believing that they are smarter and more caring than the students' parents/guardians, thereby destroying the family structure.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.10  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.1.9    2 years ago

Marx babbled on about the persistence of oppression in the bourgeois family and the need to work out a new form of the family. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.11  devangelical  replied to  afrayedknot @1.1.3    2 years ago
That being the case, you’ve already lost… for that kind of thinking (rather opinion) is indeed nothing but regressive. 

[DELETED]

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.1.12  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.8    2 years ago

Pretty sure that these kids are also being sold by democrats in the basement of a pizza shop that doesn't have a basement.

 
 
 
epistte
Junior Guide
1.1.13  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.8    2 years ago

Progressives aren't grooming anyone but it is medically impossible to change a person's gender identity, by any means. This has been known by the medical community for over 50 years. A person's psychological gender identity is nature and not nurture, so it's determined before we are born and cannot be changed, ever.  if you would understand what John Money did to David Reimer when he unethically experimented on a child to prove his nature vs. nurture theory, you would know this but you don't{deleted}.

If grooming were possible then it would be equally possible to change someone who is trans to being cisgender but that is also impossible and very dangerous to even attempt because of the long-term mental health problems that are often created by doing so.  Medical science also knows that it is equally impossible to change a person's sexual orientation from gay or bi to heterosexual because that is also innate from birth. 

The fact that drag queens are not transgender also seems to be lost on the idiots who believe this right-wing tripe. The fact that you may agree with this dangerous nonsense being spread by Tucker Carlson and Matt Walsh doesnt mean that it is objectively true.  {deleted} It's very predictable about you.

 Merry Christmas, so you don't start whining about that too.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.1.14  cjcold  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.2    2 years ago

This liberal is pretty sure that a female and a male are in for trouble.

Most marriages end in divorce.

 
 
 
Hallux
Masters Principal
1.2  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 years ago

The Federalist Society has bowed to its radical inner deviant.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
1.2.1  Jasper2529  replied to  Hallux @1.2    2 years ago
The Federalist Society has bowed to its radical inner deviant.

Character assassination doesn't lead to mature discussion of the topic.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.2.2  JBB  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.2.1    2 years ago

Do disreputable far rightwing think tanks have character?

The Federalists has no problem mischaracterizing liberals.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.2.2    2 years ago

Look at the comments here. What has been mischaracterized?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.2.4  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.3    2 years ago
What has been mischaracterized?

I won’t speak to the comments here - that’s too much to analyze. But the seeded article misrepresents both the Cambridge Dictionary and dictionaries in general. First the Cambridge Dictionary misrepresentation:

And until October of 2022, the word "woman" was still defined as, "An adult female human being" in the Cambridge Dictionary.

Not “until October of 2022,” but still . It still has that definition. “Woman,” like most words in any dictionary has had multiple definitions in the Cambridge Dictionary. Three, in fact.

1) an adult female human being

2) a wife or female sexual partner

3) women in general

And now, a fourth:

4) an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth

Other dictionaries list further definitions.

As to misrepresenting dictionaries, in general, we have this:

Yet Cambridge now says the definition of woman . . .

.

And what other human characteristics does Cambridge believe can be altered according to one's feelings?

Cambridge is not the one doing the defining. Cambridge is not saying anything about what the editors believe. That’s not how dictionaries function. They don’t define words and impose them on the populace. They catalog common usage of a word. People , through their ever-evolving use of the language, reveal to dictionary publishers what they think words mean. Common usage also prompts dictionaries to change their listings of spellings, pronunciation, and other aspects of language.

Our language and vocabulary are not static. Every year, dictionaries add words. Merriam-Webster, for example, added 370 words to its dictionary this year . These aren’t words invented by the editors of dictionaries. They are words regular people invented. The dictionary is just listing them because they get used a lot.

Woman ” was also Dictionary.com’s Word of the Year precisely because there has been so much discussion on the topic.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.2.5  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @1.2.4    2 years ago

Some Tories were born a few hundred years too late.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
1.2.6  SteevieGee  replied to  Tacos! @1.2.4    2 years ago

Dictionary.com has woman defined as "an adult female person" so the world isn't quite spinning north over south quite yet.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.2.7  cjcold  replied to  SteevieGee @1.2.6    2 years ago

Is this what is called a nothingburger?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 years ago
It is an age of insanity.

Is it "insanity" to believe that a woman can be defined by more than just genitalia? I suppose some Neanderthal minded conservatives only see women as vaginas and are apparently incapable of seeing them as complex human beings made up of both physical attributes, hormones, individual personalities, likes, dislikes, emotions and convictions.

It seems conservatives are so desperate to define the world according to their religious beliefs they forget that they still haven't proven their brand of deity even exists. They loudly proclaim that their narrowly defined male and female roles and male dominated hierarchy were created by God and thus inviolate, but cover their eyes and ears to the reality that not all humans are born into their narrowly defined conservative Christian boxes and the attempt to shove, force, smash and contort those who don't fit through their prescribed holes has done and is still doing irreparable harm to innocent people whose only sin was daring to be born different.

The decision to update the definition of 'woman' just kicks sand in the eyes of the prejudiced deplorable clingers who gnash their teeth and spit venom in their impotent rage when the world around them refuses to submit to their every demand. No one is forcing any conservative Christian to transition or to marry someone who has, so perhaps they should just shut the fuck up and mind their own business. Either that or prove their God exists and that their religious definitions are sacrosanct and should be enforced on all humanity.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3    2 years ago
Is it "insanity" to believe that a woman can be defined by more than just genitalia? I

Next, Is it "insanity" to believe that worms can be defined as human?  

Let's all just live in a world with no objective reality. Everyone just makes shit up as they go along. Men with penises  are women, Racheal Dolezal is an African American. Ward Churchill is a Cherokee.  Chris Farley was  skinny.  The earth is flat. A progressive  can never be wrong about anything.  Conservatives are just too narrow minded to understand that words don't have any actual meaning.  

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.2  arkpdx  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3    2 years ago
Is it "insanity" to believe that a woman can be defined by more than just genitalia

Have you ever heard of genetics and sex chromosomes? A woman has XX sex chromosome pair and a man has XY chromosome pair. Understand?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.1    2 years ago
Let's all just live in a world with no objective reality.

That is the apparent desire of rightwing conservative Christians. The reality was that their useless shit bag of a candidate lost the 2020 election yet 60+% are still crying foul without a lick of evidence.

Everyone just makes shit up as they go along. Men with penises  are women

Does having a penis make you a "man"? Can a person with a penis be feminine? Or do the genitals mandate that a human with a penis be "manly"? Does having a vagina make one feminine?

" Femininity is a set of attributes, behaviors, and roles generally associated with women and girls. Femininity can be understood as socially constructed , and there is also some evidence that some behaviors considered feminine are influenced by both cultural factors and biological factors ."

Femininity - Wikipedia

I get that having a penis is "generally associated" with men and boys, but does that make one "manly"?

"Masculinity  (also called  manhood  or  manliness ) is a set of attributes,  behaviors , and roles associated with  men  and  boys . Masculinity can be theoretically understood as  socially constructed ,  and there is also evidence that some behaviors considered masculine are influenced by both cultural factors and biological factors . To what extent masculinity is biologically or socially influenced is subject to debate"

Masculinity - Wikipedia

But besides all the definitions and debate, the question remains, why the FUCK does anyone think they get to make those decisions for others around them? And why the FUCK should some dip shit conservative Christian get to label and define those around them and call anyone stupid or mental if they disagree with the narrow shit filled optics of some useless asshole who thinks they know the mind of an imaginary fucking God?

The reality is that if conservative Christians believe they have the right to set male/female roles for everyone around them and declare the lgtbq community as 'invalid', everyone else has the right to do the same to the sorry worthless piece of shit conservatives who believe themselves the arbiters of some imaginary Gods will.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3    2 years ago
Is it "insanity"

It is insanity to try to defy science. There are only 2 genders.

One is either born male or born female.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3    2 years ago
Is it "insanity" to believe that a woman can be defined by more than just genitalia?

Lets see.  200 years from now, a body will be dug up (for what ever reason).  They will look at the skeletal remains, specifically the pelvis, and based on that pelvis they will declare they are either male or female.  

So you're right, it's more than just genitalia.  Its skeletal, genetics and it's DNA.  Just because Shamus the shithead wants to be called a woman, doesn't make him a woman.  And it doesn't mean everybody has to take part in the Shamus' fantasy.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 years ago
It is insanity to try to defy science.

This is hilarious.  Some of the very people that were screaming to believe the science when it come to COVID are ignoring the science when it comes to this.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.7  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 years ago
One is either born male or born female.

"Sex is just as complicated as humans are. What seems a rather straightforward concept—with an unequivocal answer to the proverbial delivery room question, “Is it a boy or a girl?”—is in reality full of nuances and complexities, just like any human trait. From a biological standpoint, the appearance of the external genitalia is only one parameter among many, including chromosomal constitution, the sequence of sex-determining genes, gonadal structure, the profile of gonadal hormones, and the internal reproductive structures .

One of the pillars of the modern scientific method is to test models and try to prove them wrong. 1   However, sex and sexuality have long been an exception to modern standards of science because of the perceived consequences of scientific findings on controversial social debates. Human sexual anatomy was categorized into five types in the 19th century. An individual could be a female or a male (with typical feminine or masculine external genitalia, respectively), a female or male pseudohermaphrodite, or a true hermaphrodite. Male or female pseudohermaphrodite—terms no longer appropriate—referred to individuals with ambiguous external genitalia, a blurring between masculine and feminine features, and the presence of either testes or ovaries. True hermaphrodites have both testicular and ovarian tissue. As noted by Dreger, 2   this model, centered on the gonadal anatomy, was adopted by clinicians, and all patients born with ambiguous genitalia were traditionally classified into one of these categories. For example, individuals born with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia have been categorized as female pseudohermaphrodites.

However, scientific advances of the past half century have shown that this model, taking into consideration exclusively the type of gonads, is inaccurate. The early embryological experiments of Jost in 1947 suggested that sex development can be viewed as a two-phase process: sex determination (the orientation of an originally undifferentiated and bipotential gonad into either testis or ovary) and sex differentiation (the development of external and internal genitalia) . It took a little more than 40 years to identify the main molecular trigger of sex determination, the Y-linked, DNA-binding and -bending transcription factor SRY. 3 , 4   Mutations in SRY in XY individuals cause gonadal dysgenesis and a female phenotype, providing strong genetic evidence that it is a major sex-determining gene . However, few patients with disorders of sex determination can be explained by mutations in SRY, indicating the existence of other sex-determining genes that have been progressively identified since 1990. 5  As for sex differentiation, most genes that have been well characterized code either for hormonal biosynthetic enzymes or hormone receptors. The sheer number of genes involved in sex development, the variety of their products, and the diversity of their function has led to the notion of sex as a complex trait in which “molecular sex” influences the various steps of sex determination and sex differentiation.

The spectacular molecular advances in our understanding of sex now warrant a reevaluation of the standard classification , which has become too vague to be efficient for the accurate analysis of outcomes data . From a patient's perspective, the nomenclature has two main issues. One is gender labeling, which is often psychologically harmful to the patient. For instance, a woman with androgen insensitivity syndrome would find herself being called a  male  pseudohermaphrodite, in complete contradiction to her phenotypic sex and, most probably, gender identity. In addition, inclusion of gender in a diagnostic label increases confusion for the parents and even the medical team at the time of gender assignment decisions."

We used to call them hermaphrodites | Genetics in Medicine (nature.com)

So it seems science, facts and reality disagree with your layman opinion.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.8  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.7    2 years ago

One is either born male or born female.

That statement stands like a rock.  Thanks for the article.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.9  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.8    2 years ago

INCORRECT

These things are not so black and white as you proclaim

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.10  Tessylo  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3    2 years ago

It's all about sex to some when there is so much more to male and female and sex and love and relationships

And no one elses' business or concern.  Shit or get off the pot

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.11  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.9    2 years ago
These things are not so black and white as you proclaim

Wait a minute....where have I heard that before?

Don't say anything....It's coming back to me.....I'm in a Dentist office.....

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.12  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.8    2 years ago
One is either born male or born female. That statement stands like a rock.

So you're claiming hermaphrodites do not exist? You should probably let the biologists know about such supposedly sturdy "facts" that fly in the face of science, biology and reality. I'm sure they'll just accept it when you explain that you know this to be true because your pappy or your preacher told you so.

The fact is that hermaphrodites do exist, as do varying degrees of male and female pseudohermaphrodites. This means the moronic notion that humans are only born male or female is clearly total unadulterated bullshit. It also means that the ridiculous moronic conservative Christian rhetoric about sexuality is not only flawed, it's dangerous and harmful to those who are not born into their worthless bigoted dipshit defined narrow gender roles.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.13  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.3    2 years ago

We can see some from the right say that they are not prejudiced against trans, they just want to follow biology, in that one is born with either female or male genitalia. 

In a vacuum this makes some sense. Certainly virtually all people are one or the other biologically at birth. 

Where the thing goes sideways is when a person feels they are opposite sex living in the wrong body, and so they seek to make some sort of "change" in order to look more like they feel. 

I think the best way for others to deal with this predicament (for others) is to mind their own business. 

But many of them cant, for the reason you laid out - their religious (or political) beliefs wont let them mind their own business. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
1.3.14  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 years ago
It is insanity to try to defy science. There are only 2 genders.

Actually, what do you call a person who carries XXY or XYY or XYXY, or XXXY chromosomes, because all these people exist?

So gender as we understand it, it is a bit more complicated

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.15  Sean Treacy  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.14    2 years ago

 call a person who carries XXY or XYY or XYXY, or XXXY chromosomes, because all these people exist?

do those people carry working male and female sex organs? 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.16  sandy-2021492  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.7    2 years ago

That is more complicated than many people want to understand or acknowledge.  XX = female and XY = male is simple and easy to remember.  Never mind that, as often happens with, well, everything, simple and easy is often wrong or at least inadequate to describe reality.

Sex and gender are determined by so much more than one pair of chromosomes.  Extra chromosomes.  Mutations in SRY.  5 a- Reductase deficiency.

Maternal sex hormone levels during gestation.

one study ( 21 ) found that maternal testosterone during pregnancy predicted male-typical versus female-typical interests in adult female offspring, and another ( 22 ) found that maternal testosterone during pregnancy predicted the amount of male-typical behaviour in female offspring at the age of 3.5 years. This last study used the same measure of childhood sex-typed behaviour as has also been used in studies of females with CAH, thus providing directly comparable evidence of similar, though less marked, influences of testosterone on the development of children’s behaviour.

It's complicated.  More complicated than can be covered in most high school biology courses.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.17  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.14    2 years ago
So gender as we understand it, it is a bit more complicated

Since when?

Only facts are real. This is another progressive novelty that should have been stopped in its tracks.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.18  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.12    2 years ago

This is what happens when people do not stand up immediately against the absurd. We eventually have people who try to normalize this shit.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.19  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.13    2 years ago
is when a person feels they are opposite sex living in the wrong body, and so they seek to make some sort of "change" in order to look more like they feel. 

Who would that be?

A child who got nudged by a leftist teacher?

What do you say to a child who wants to make an irreversable life altering physical change?

Better still, what do you tell them when they become very unhappy adults who then claim that they made a terrible mistake?


All of this is happening because of the woke left!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.20  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.17    2 years ago
Only facts are real.

Do you deny these variations of chromosomes in human beings?

Biology is extremely complicated.   Do you deny that too?

We continue to learn more about the human body (and that includes the brain).   Do you deny that?

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.21  arkpdx  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.14    2 years ago
Actually, what do you call a person who carries XXY or XYY or XYXY, or XXXY chromosomes, because all these people exist?

How many of those people actually exist? How many of them consider themselves a different sex than the one they presented when born? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.22  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.20    2 years ago

Do you deny that there are only 2 genders?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.23  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.22    2 years ago

Are you unaware of hermaphroditism?   After all, Vic, this has been well known for your and my entire lifetimes.

There are two extremes in the continuum:  male and female.   But there are complexities in-between these extremes.

It is silly to refuse to recognize the continuum and stubbornly insist that only the extremes exist.

That said, society is currently expanding gender-speak to a silly stage.   This is natural in society — we oscillate and tend to take things to the limit before stabilizing.   Eventually the gender variation explosion will settle down and we will have consistent, well-founded labels across the continuum.   But the labels will not be limited to two: male or female.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.24  arkpdx  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.23    2 years ago
Are you unaware of hermaphroditism

Are you aware that they make up an estimated less than one tenth of one percent of the population and in reality there have only been about 525 known cases. 

Are we to be expected to change a whole language that has managed perfectly fine for centuries for so few people most of whom probably don't give a damn?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.25  TᵢG  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.24    2 years ago
Are you aware that they make up an estimated less than one tenth of one percent of the population and in reality there have only been about 525 known cases. 

Yes I know it is rare.   Irrelevant.   The point is that the continuum exists.

Are we to be expected to change a whole language that has managed perfectly fine for centuries for so few people most of whom probably don't give a damn?

Language evolves regardless of what you personally want.   My advice is to adapt because there is nothing you can do to stop it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.26  Texan1211  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.24    2 years ago
Are we to be expected to change a whole language

I think I will call males males and females females and not worry about a chance meeting with an infinitely small sector of the human population.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.27  arkpdx  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.25    2 years ago
Language evolves regardless of what you personally want.

So instead we have to do what you or some mental Ill person wants?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.28  TᵢG  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.27    2 years ago
So instead we have to do what you or some mental Ill person wants?

You can fight the evolution of natural language but it is futile.    So knock yourself out arkpdx and get all bent out of shape over cultural dynamics.

I, personally, do not let these transient fluctuations bother me.   And I do not care if you want to deem everyone either male or female.   But if you insist on denying biology then I will correct you.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.29  JBB  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.25    2 years ago

It is amusing (almost) how angry and agitated a few old poops, who probably hardly ever encounter any transexuals, get when implored to please have some compassion and not cruelly abuse them...

They say how dare society ask them to merely be respectful of fragile vulnerable children at huge risk of suicide because of the cruelty they live with and how difficult their lives are.

No Sir! They are entitled to be as boorish as they can to be!

By God, in the unlikely event they ever encounter a sexually ambiguous person then they are entitled to ridicule them as cruelty and as viciously as is humanly possible. By Golly!

SMH...

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.30  arkpdx  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.28    2 years ago
But if you insist on denying biology then I will correct you.

I am not denying anything I accept reality. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.31  TᵢG  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.30    2 years ago

Then what are you whining about?    My post noted that gender is a continuum and that this is based on biology.   My post also noted that society oscillates and language is affected by same.

If you have a problem with reality as I described it then make an argument.  And, as I noted, I personally do not care if you want to categorize everyone as male or female in your own little world.   Knock yourself out.   So don’t play the pathetic victim and pretend I am trying to impose on you simply by explaining reality.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.32  JBB  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.30    2 years ago

If you encountered these young people would you really make a big deal about any gender ambiguity regarding how they represent?

original

It would never occur to me that they were not being authentic...

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.3.33  afrayedknot  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.28    2 years ago

“…insist on denying biology…”

Not just biology, but denying identity.

Whether it be the friends one shares, the team one roots for, the food one enjoys, or even the political party which one aligns, et al….they all define a personal identity.

Emphasis on personal…

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
1.3.34  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.17    2 years ago
Since when?

Only facts are real. This is another progressive novelty that should have been stopped in its tracks.

And I gave you facts. There are people who carry  XXY, XYY, XYXY, and XXXY chromosomes. Their genotype says they are neither male nor female. That is not progressivism. That is a scientific fact.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.35  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.34    2 years ago

Additional copies of the X chromosone do not make anyone something different, only something less sexually.

Again there are only 2 genders: male or female.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
1.3.36  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.35    2 years ago

First of all, gender is not a scientific word. It is a word to assign a designation. 

And how is someone, "something less sexually"? Please explain.

Chromosomes are everything we are. Those extra copies affect the body both in chemistry and sexually. These people are affected in many different ways, and some of those ways are their brain chemistry. And as many scientists will tell you, is that the brain is the biggest sexual organ there is.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.37  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.36    2 years ago
And how is someone, " something less sexually"? Please explain.

Here:




 These people are affected in many different ways, and some of those ways are their brain chemistry. And as many scientists will tell you, is that the brain is the biggest sexual organ there is.

How come we didn't have sexual confusion befor the arrival of the woke?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.38  devangelical  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.16    2 years ago

[DELETED]

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.39  arkpdx  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.36    2 years ago
Chromosomes are everything we are. 

Having XX chromosomes makes you a female and having XY chromosome s makes you make. It doesn't matter how many surgeries you have or how much of one hormone or another you take , nothing can change that. Are men and woman impersonating each other with an real elaborate costume

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.40  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.37    2 years ago

Bullshit! In pre-woke 1952 George Jorgensen became Christine Jorgensen original

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
1.3.41  Jasper2529  replied to  JBB @1.3.40    2 years ago

Hormonal therapy, surgeries, wigs, and cosmetics cannot alter Jorgensen's, or anyone's, DNA.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.42  Split Personality  replied to  JBB @1.3.40    2 years ago

"Glen or Glenda"  a 1953 film about a transvestite and pseudohermaphrodite.

This topic is not new but the advances in surgery are making these things possible. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.43  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.3.40    2 years ago

Was he the first?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.44  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.43    2 years ago

She was first to go public after it became medically possible!

Transexuals existed forever. Transexualism is not a new thing.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.45  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.3.44    2 years ago

So he was the first to go public in all of those centuries before 1952?

BTW, in the old neighborhood of that time, he wouldn't heve been able to walk 1 block.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.46  JBB  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.3.41    2 years ago

Vic asked how come we didn't have transexuals pre-woke in comment #1.3.37 which was dumb as they are not related!

Transexualism was already around in ancient Mesopotamia!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.47  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.3.46    2 years ago

What is beyond dumb and beyond reason is trying to sell this insidious poison to the American public and especially our young children.

So Transexualism took a few centuries off?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.48  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.45    2 years ago

No Vic, sex change surgery did not exist before the 1950s but transexuals have existing forever. Surgery does not make a person a transexual. Surgery only make their outside match with their inners selves. There were transexuals in ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome.  Transexualism is not a modern phenomenon... 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.49  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.3.48    2 years ago

There will always be fetishes and alternate life styles, but there was never an attempt to normalize them until now.

Now that the left has used science they even try to deny it.

Male and Female. That's all there is.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.50  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.47    2 years ago

No, but the suicide rate for transexual youth has always been off the charts [DELETED]

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.51  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.45    2 years ago
BTW, in the old neighborhood of that time, he wouldn't heve been able to walk 1 block.

Yes, bigotry has been around for a long time, too.  And violence as a result of bigotry.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.52  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.51    2 years ago

I had to read that twice. I accidently flagged it.

Yes, Sandy, in my old neighborhood we dared not even wear white socks.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.53  arkpdx  replied to  JBB @1.3.50    2 years ago

True that but the suicide rate does not change much after transition either. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.54  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.53    2 years ago

Sex change operations are life altering.

A heavy price to pay for someone who is confused about their identity.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.55  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.54    2 years ago
Sex change operations are life altering.

Yes, after years of therapy and surgeries, most can finally sleep at night very satisfied with what they have fixed and accomplished.

A heavy price to pay for someone who is confused about their identity.

The confusion appears to be the problem of those who have appointed themselves as some sort of higher moral authority who are in fact themselves  confused about their judgmental self-righteousness. 

“Mockers are proud and haughty; they act with boundless arrogance” (Proverbs 21:24, NLT).

Pride is at the heart of prejudice.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.56  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.55    2 years ago
ies, most can finally sleep at night very satisfied with what they have fixed and accomplished.

Except for the higher rate of suicide after surgery, you've got a point. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.57  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.55    2 years ago
most can

Many have deep regrets


The confusion appears to be the problem of those who have appointed themselves as some sort of higher moral authority who are in fact themselves  confused about their judgmental self-righteousness. 

It always comes down to what feels good.


Pride is at the heart of prejudice.

You should reserve that for the appropriate people

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.58  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.56    2 years ago

The NIH, National Library of Medicine and the National Center for Biotechnology Information disagree.

Of course you can find statistics from questionable sources all over the internet concerning 30 year old studies from Sweden. (The Heritage Foundation)

The Mental Health Commission of Canada disagrees.

Pre surgery 67% of all patients considered suicide as opposed to 3% post surgery.

Transgender people and suicide fact sheet - Mental Health Commission of Canada

A life time of discrimination may not be reversable by gender reassignment.

Teenaged LGBTQ people are 4 times as likely to commit suicide than their peers.

The most recent study, ironically from Boston, disagrees.

BOSTON, April 28, 2021—A new study published today in JAMA Surgery found that gender-affirming surgery is associated with improved mental health outcomes among transgender people. The study was authored by researchers at Harvard Medical School, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, The Fenway Institute at Fenway Health, and the Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital. It is the first large-scale, controlled study to demonstrate an association between gender-affirming surgery and improved mental health outcomes and adds important new knowledge to the field as there is little high-quality evidence regarding the mental health effects of gender-affirming surgery. New Study Shows Transgender People Who Receive Gender-Affirming Surgery are Significantly Less Likely to Experience Psychological Distress or Suicidal Ideation - Fenway Health: Health Care Is A Right, Not A Privilege.

An old HuffPost article expresses it best.

Being seen as transgender or gender non-conforming increases suicide risk

People who are seen as transgender or gender non-conforming are more likely to have attempted suicide. Also, people who have had access to surgery which allows them to "pass," such as facial feminization surgery, report qualities of life not significantly different  from the general population. This is perhaps the most damning study, since it strongly suggests that when transgender people are treated the same as cisgender (non-transgender) people, the risk of suicide becomes no different than for anyone else.

...

Intersecting minority identities increases suicide risk

Multiple studies have found that transgender people of color are at higher risk of suicide than white transgender people. This is a result of the combined effects of racial and gender identity discrimination.

Notice a pattern here? None of these risks for suicide are about being transgender. They're about what is being done to transgender people. And therein lies the rub.

There's nothing inherently wrong with being transgender .

There is something horribly, horribly wrong with the way we as a culture treat transgender people.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has addressed the issue of suicide in LGBT populations, and reached the same conclusions on the actual causes of suicide in the transgender community:

The Truth About Transgender Suicide | HuffPost Voices

Then of course we could talk about other groups with higher suicide rates,

but that's no easier to discuss if you haven't walked in those shoes either.

Veterans are 52% more likely to commit suicide than non veterans.

Veterans have an adjusted suicide rate that is 52.3% greater than the non-veteran US adult population. 7 People who have previously served in the military account for about 13.7% of suicides among adults in the United States. 7 Disparities in Suicide | CDC

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.59  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.57    2 years ago
Many have deep regrets

True about many things, as to this topic, if you cannot document it with context,

its a fairly meaningless opinion generated by prejudice.

The confusion appears to be the problem of those who have appointed themselves as some sort of higher moral authority who are in fact themselves  confused about their judgmental self-righteousness.
 It always comes down to what feels good.

For whom?  If it were illegal or against the Constitution, you would have a case.

It isn't, all you have is opinions about your own preferences. The world doesn't care.

Pride is at the heart of prejudice.
You should reserve that for the appropriate people.

I do. Perhaps a little self reflection is in order every Thursday?

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.3.60  cjcold  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.30    2 years ago
I am not denying anything I accept reality. 

You accept your own small slice of far right-wing reality.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.61  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.49    2 years ago
There will always be fetishes and alternate life styles

There is no “fetish” involved and it’s not a lifestyle, either. Unfortunately, people whose minds are closed to things they don’t understand have long demonized LGBTQ people by proclaiming, without proof, that such people are sexual beasts who cannot control their lusts and prey on the “innocent” straights of the world. It’s a twisted and destructive kind of bigotry. You should reject it.

Now that the left has used science they even try to deny it.

Male and Female. That's all there is.

On the contrary, there is now substantial scientific research revealing that both our physical and mental sexuality are far more complex and nuanced than many people understand.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.62  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.61    2 years ago

My friend, I know you mean what you say, but don't ever be fooled. This discussion is not about anybody's rights.

This is about the coruption of young children.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.63  arkpdx  replied to  cjcold @1.3.60    2 years ago

Better and saner than you far left wing woke fantasy. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.64  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.62    2 years ago
This is about the coruption of young children.

This is a false claim people keep making because they think that invoking “the children” as hysterically as possible will end all debate. After all, no one wants to be accused of not caring about children.

But the children are doing just fine.  A new entry in the Cambridge Dictionary isn’t going to change that.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.65  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.64    2 years ago
But the children are doing just fine.

Exactly. It's only the old, close minded, well past their expiration date bigots whose heads are exploding over the simple fact that " physical and mental sexuality are far more complex and nuanced than many people understand".

And not only do these old useless bigots not understand, they shake their heads and close their eyes while throwing a screaming tantrum when anyone dares challenge their long held indoctrinated religious fictions about human sexuality and human origins.

What they apparently don't realize is that their own kids are laughing at them behind their backs and those with more than half a brain are getting as far away from their decayed dying trees of prejudice as they can. Rational young folk continue to move further from their roots of prejudice and the support for the lgtbq community continues to grow while the useless prejudiced deadwood is thankfully dying off without being replaced in any significant numbers.

3-20-13-1.png

Growing Support for Gay Marriage: Changed Minds and Changing Demographics | Pew Research Center

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.66  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.64    2 years ago

This has all followed a familiar patern: Radical theories soon gain credence within academia, then the democratic party and soon become political agendas for the ruling elite. Let us all note the immediate legal recognition of multiple genders without any popular consensus.


But the children are doing just fine.  A new entry in the Cambridge Dictionary isn’t going to change that.

You are being very naive.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.67  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.66    2 years ago

I know I will always call a man a man, a woman a woman, and if some choose to call them something they aren't, that is their prerogative.

We can't be forced into participating in idiocy.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.68  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.67    2 years ago

The destruction of role models played a part in this nonsense

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.69  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.67    2 years ago
We can't be forced into participating in idiocy.

Conservatives seem determined to force everyone to participate in their idiocy. Their biology class consists of teaching children that humans with dangly bits are male and those without are female and that both MUST conform to their religious conservative ideals for the two religiously defined genders. Who cares if science shows that some people are born with different chromosomes, differing amounts of gonadal tissue or ovarian tissue with the wrong corresponding genital's, true hermaphrodites with both sex organs or pseudohermaphrodites, along with the people who are born with genitals that don't match their mental sexuality.

But of course it would be "idiocy" to recognize the complexity of such a topic when the religious conservatives have already declared the answer as certified by their invisible wizard in the sky, that there are only two genders and the one with the penis should always be in charge and always be the head of the family. How can anyone doubt religious conservatives, many of whom believe the universe is only 9,000 years old, they always know what is truth and what is best for humans, right? /s

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.70  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.67    2 years ago
We can't be forced into participating in idiocy.

I stopped playing make believe when I was a child.  I'm damn sure not going to play it as an adult.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.71  Texan1211  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.69    2 years ago

Look, if you want to call a man something he isn't, feel free, as previously stated.

I will continue to call males males and females females.

I won't participate in lunacy to satisfy some weird whims of idiots.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.72  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.66    2 years ago
This has all followed a familiar patern:

Only in the conspiracy theory handbook.

You are being very naive.

You are acting like chicken little.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.73  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.67    2 years ago
We can't be forced into participating in idiocy.

Exactly.  You are entitled to exercise your free will

just as "they" are.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.74  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.71    2 years ago
Look, if you want to call a man something he isn't, feel free, as previously stated.

Too funny. Pot, Kettle.  The irony is that you don't realize it.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.75  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.66    2 years ago
Radical theories soon gain credence within academia

So, being educated is a bad thing?

Radical theories tend to gain credence with academia,because critical analysis reveals those theories to be true. There is a long, distinguished list of such radical theories: Round Earth, heliocentrism, germ theory, gravity, magnetism, evolution, atomic theory, plate tectonics, quantum mechanics, and last but not least: seat belts save lives. 

All of the above - and many many more - were once considered radical theories and rejected by closed-minded conservatives who grow uncomfortable whenever anyone tries to teach them something new about their world.

Let us all note the immediate legal recognition of multiple genders without any popular consensus.

There was nothing “immediate” about it.

Popular consensus is a pretty useless method for getting at scientific truth. It is also historically slow at providing justice to minority groups. In other words, it’s nothing to be particularly proud of in this context.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.76  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.73    2 years ago
Exactly.  You are entitled to exercise your free will just as "they" are.

So glad you agree with me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.77  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.74    2 years ago
Too funny. Pot, Kettle.  The irony is that you don't realize it.

I sure am sorry my words befuddled you so.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.3.78  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.77    2 years ago

“I sure am sorry my words befuddled you so.”

Too funny, tex…your words are a constant, consistent source of befuddlement…

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.79  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.3.78    2 years ago
Too funny, tex…your words are a constant, consistent source of befuddlement…

I can't understand them for you.

Tell me which ones you didn't understand and I'll see what I can do to explain them to you.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.80  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.77    2 years ago
Look, if you want to call a man something he isn't, feel free, as previously stated

Not befuddled at all.

You call people things they are not very frequently here, hence the irony.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.81  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.80    2 years ago
You call people things they are not very frequently here,

Quote me.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.82  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.75    2 years ago
So, being educated is a bad thing?

Being indoctrinated is a terrible thing.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.83  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.82    2 years ago
Being indoctrinated is a terrible thing.

How does that happen? Someone tells a student a thing and they turn off their brain? Parents are no longer able to have a conversation with their own children? What goes on in a classroom is secret?

There's so much hysteria right now about classrooms whether it's K-12 or college, and almost none of it is based in reason or actual observation.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.3.84  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.82    2 years ago

“Being indoctrinated is a terrible thing”

Being intolerant is just that. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.85  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @1.3.84    2 years ago
Being intolerant is just that. 

And that would be your side of the aisle, starting with calling white Cubans "hateful."

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.86  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.83    2 years ago
How does that happen?

That happens when one goes to college and places all of their trust in a professor.


Someone tells a student a thing and they turn off their brain?

Have you ever listened to some of the lectures?  They are very convincing.


Parents are no longer able to have a conversation with their own children?

A lot of this has been hidden from parents.


What goes on in a classroom is secret?

Wasn't that the lesson of the pandemic and stay at home teaching?


There's so much hysteria right now about classrooms whether it's K-12 or college, and almost none of it is based in reason or actual observation.

I appreciate that you try to be open minded. The left does not repect you for that. Don't ever forget it.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.87  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.83    2 years ago
How does that happen? Someone tells a student a thing and they turn off their brain?

There's this whole multi billion dollar  industry called advertising...

But of course, everyone believes they are immune to it. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.88  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.86    2 years ago
That happens when one goes to college and places all of their trust in a professor.

How often does that happen?

Have you ever listened to some of the lectures?  They are very convincing.

BS.  You go to class, learn the topics and regurgitate what gets you the best grade.

College turns out skeptics not robots.

Parents are no longer able to have a conversation with their own children? A lot of this has been hidden from parents.

More conspiracies? jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

What goes on in a classroom is secret? Wasn't that the lesson of the pandemic and stay at home teaching?

No.

There's so much hysteria right now about classrooms whether it's K-12 or college, and almost none of it is based in reason or actual observation. I appreciate that you try to be open minded.

So do I.

The left does not respect you for that. Don't ever forget it.

Poor you, so divisive.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.89  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  afrayedknot @1.3.78    2 years ago
your words are a constant, consistent source of befuddlement…

More like Elmer Fuddlement...

"Shhhhhh! I'm here to hunt some wiberals!..."

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.90  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.87    2 years ago

A person can be influenced or persuaded by anyone or anything. Professors, pastors, music, literature, poetry, movies. The list is probably endless. That’s life. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.91  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.82    2 years ago
Being indoctrinated is a terrible thing.

Except when it's done by conservative Christian parents and peers?

Teaching a young and impressionable child that there is an invisible spirit being that watches their every move and knows their every thought and demands worship and obedience with absolutely zero evidence of said spirit being is indoctrination.

Teaching a young and impressionable child about how science has estimated the actual age of the earth, about climate science, about biology and the facts and evidence of evolution, teaching what we humans have discovered about physics and the universe, that's called being educated.

Science says that humans are born in an innumerable variety of shapes, sizes, colors, genetic pre-dispositions, sexual orientations, physical abilities and disabilities and chromosomes. Science teaches how complex and unique every human is but that every human is valuable and perfectly normal just the way they are because nature doesn't give a fuck about religious doctrines and definitions.

It takes indoctrination to begin to believe something unproven and often counter to all visible evidence. It takes indoctrination to believe the earth was actually created in 6 days and is only 9,000 years old. It takes indoctrination to believe that male and female are the only variety of humans and that "righteous" humans must treat anything outside of those narrowly defined genders and gender roles as a perversion that must be attacked and maligned. It takes indoctrination to believe that treating others with disrespect, violence and discrimination is okay simply because they refuse to kneel down and accept conservative Christians religious beliefs on gender and sexuality.

You've got to be taught to hate and fear
You've got to be taught from year to year
It's got to be drummed in your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made
And people whose skin is a different shade
You've got to be carefully taught

You've got to be taught before it's too late
Before you are six or seven or eight
To hate all the people your relatives hate
You've got to be carefully taught
- Rodgers & Hammerstein
added line for today:
You've got to be taught to rage and sneer
At people who admit they are gay or queer
Refusing service to those people you fear
You've got to be carefully taught...
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.92  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.90    2 years ago
rofessors, pastors, music, literature, poetry, movies. The list is probably endless. That’s life. 

That's my point. The idea that minors or young adults aren't going to be influenced by teachers, with the power and authority of  the state as dispensors of behind them, is simply naïve and contrary to all human experience. The whole point of education is to indoctrinate students, it just a question of upon what subjects and with what messaging. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.93  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.92    2 years ago
The idea that minors or young adults aren't going to be influenced by teachers, with the power and authority of  the state as dispensors of behind them, is simply naïve and contrary to all human experience.

Sure, but the idea that parents, friends, pastors, doctors, etc. are helpless in the face of this alleged rhetorical onslaught is ridiculous. However, that requires building a relationship with the kids we care about. We have to listen to what they say, and have real conversations with them. Parents are responsible, not helpless.

But if people want to turn over the job of parenting to teachers, then yeah: you’ll get the kid the teacher wants to raise.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.94  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.93    2 years ago
Sure, but the idea that parents, friends, pastors, doctors, etc. are helpless in the face of this alleged rhetorical onslaught is ridiculous.

I think the reason those parties, especially in some rural and bible-belt areas, are angry at public schools that occasionally teach something that is contrary to their 'parents, friends, pastors, doctors, etc.' views is because they see the schools as preventing, 'cock-blocking', their own attempted indoctrination of the children. If they get everyone in the orbit of their children to agree and repeat the same religious conservative messages, they hope to isolate the child and never really give them a chance to make up their own minds based on a broad knowledge base before they're an adult.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.95  Tacos!  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.94    2 years ago
they see the schools as preventing, 'cock-blocking', their own attempted indoctrination of the children. If they get everyone in the orbit of their children to agree and repeat the same religious conservative messages, they hope to isolate the child and never really give them a chance to make up their own minds based on a broad knowledge base before they're an adult.

This, entirely. Evangelical churches, in particular, are obsessed with shielding their congregations (adult and child alike) from all sorts of influences that make them uncomfortable. It might be TV, movies, music, or the public school system. They have shockingly feeble faith in their own professed beliefs and the strength of their personal relationships. Thus, they live in perpetual fear that exposure to other ideas and influences will cause either themselves or their loved ones to became Satan worshipers.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.96  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.93    2 years ago
pastors, doctors, etc. are helpless in the face of this alleged rhetorical onslaught is ridiculous

So teachers should have carte blanche to  teach kids whatever they want (today's lesson is from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion!) just because there are other people who can also influence a student? Seems to me the more rational plan is to avoid teaching garbage in the first place and just assume the students will be taught otherwise. 

 you’ll get the kid the teacher wants to raise

Kids friends group are at least as important as parents, if you believe the science.   And if a kids peers all are taught the same garbage, the effect multiplies.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.97  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.95    2 years ago
hey have shockingly feeble faith in their own professed beliefs and the strength of their personal relationship

Or maybe its because they are dealing with their kids and know them best and know what they are ready to handle. Every sane person agrees kids should be shielded from some things.  I don't think anyone believes showing 6 year old gruesome  videos of people being killed is a good idea. So it becomes a question of where one draws the line, and everyone will probably have a different one, which is okay. 

As you said, unless ,want to turn over the job of parenting to teachers, then yeah, parents should be involved in what their kids are exposed to. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.98  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.96    2 years ago
So teachers should have carte blanche to  teach kids whatever they want

Who said that? And where is that happening? Schools have curricula prescribed by state law, school boards, and principals. Teachers follow that with some mix of their own personal style. They are subject to review by those same authorities and their lesson plans are not secret.

Kids friends group are at least as important as parents, if you believe the science.   And if a kids peers all are taught the same garbage, the effect multiplies.  

Gosh! How did we end up with you, then? Just lucky?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.3.99  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.97    2 years ago
I don't think anyone believes showing 6 year old gruesome  videos of people being killed is a good idea.

Is that happening somewhere?

parents should be involved in what their kids are exposed to. 

But the panic mongering from the Evangelical sector would have us believe that such parental involvement would be futile. The teachers are too powerful!

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.100  arkpdx  replied to  Tacos! @1.3.99    2 years ago
Is that happening somewhere? 

No it is not because sensible people passed laws and regulations and policies and ordinances to keep young children away from such things just as they want to keep young children from learning about sexual things. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.101  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.91    2 years ago

Your side is not virtuous.

Exhibit A: Calling white Cubans "hateful."

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.102  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.101    2 years ago
Your side is not virtuous

You keep repeating that sweeping generalization as if you have scored some kind of point.

Exhibit A: Calling white Cubans "hateful."

You keep repeating that without a citation.

Don't worry though, I know enough Cubans in Miami to realize that they are very 

racial among themselves and their own families, much like my older Mexican relatives in TX and CA.

Spanish culture in Cuba and Mexico was very stratified until slavery was ceased

only 138 years ago but prejudice doesn't die because of some words on paper.

The darker you were, the more the lighter skin toned ones talk negatively about you, it's just another form of racial prejudice.

"Hateful" may or may not apply equally in all cases but it conveys a degree of the truth.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.103  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.102    2 years ago
You keep repeating that without a citation.

Shall I post it or simply direct you to the member who wrote it?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.104  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.103    2 years ago

Either way is fine, however I will always caution you not to make sweeping generalizations about how a particular comment by an individual is or is not representative of a whole group of people.

Being offended by such behavior and emulating the same behavior

is not a good look. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.105  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.104    2 years ago

Here:

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.106  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.101    2 years ago

You did that vic

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.107  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.105    2 years ago

So a remark about a publicly self-avowed racist who happens to be a white Cuban,

( both true facts)

by a different member, (not present on this seed),

on a different article three weeks ago

is somehow in your world applicable to "Your side".

Besides being a sweeping generalization, it is a CoC on several levels.

Try staying in your lane and start worrying about what's going on in this article.

Thanks

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.108  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.107    2 years ago

What if Ye and Fuentes are about to be hit by a train.  You can only save one, what do you do?

Waiter, I’d like a sublime Sazerac, please.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.109  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.108    2 years ago

LMAO !

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.3.110  cjcold  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.63    2 years ago

Do you even know what "woke" means?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.111  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.107    2 years ago
So a remark about a publicly self-avowed racist who happens to be a white Cuban, ( both true facts)

And the calling out of white Cubans as hateful?  Is that a true fact?


[deleted]

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.3.112  cjcold  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.63    2 years ago

Still not sure what woke means.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.113  arkpdx  replied to  cjcold @1.3.112    2 years ago

According to the dictionary.com website 

having or marked by an active awareness of systemic injustices and prejudices, especially those involving the treatment of ethnic, racial, or sexual minorities:

In any case most of wokeness if not all is pure unadulterated bullshit. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.114  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.111    2 years ago

I explained myself in comment 1.3.102...

On the other hand, we can compare the comment your so obviously bothered by, quite fairly to how many times you get away with saying "liberals and progressives are vile evil scum" and just leave it at that. 

Happy Holidays.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.115  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.114    2 years ago
how many times you get away with saying "liberals and progressives are vile evil scum" and just leave it at that. 

Which is never when you are around. However, I have borrowed a tactic from your friends and now I always submit the word "most" before progressives.

Merry Christmas.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.116  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.115    2 years ago
Which is never when you are around.

Meta, but I appreciate the attention to detail.

However, I have borrowed a tactic from your friends and now I always submit the word "most" before progressives.

The clues have always been in the CoC, are you suggesting that "my friends" are just smarter than the average member?

Merry Christmas.

That was so yesterday Vic, literally.

Happy New Year

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.117  Split Personality  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.113    2 years ago
In any case most of wokeness if not all is pure unadulterated bullshit. 

So is most religion and religious beliefs, but hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.118  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.116    2 years ago
Meta,

That's why you keep coming back for one more shot.


The clues have always been in the CoC, are you suggesting that "my friends" are just smarter than the average member?

If they were smart they wouldn't take on so many losing arguments. No, let's just say they've been lucky to have you as a friend.


That was so yesterday Vic, literally.

Oh, You're so clever!


Happy New Year

Don't forget the big day in May.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.119  arkpdx  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.117    2 years ago
So is most religion and religious beliefs, but hey, whatever helps you sleep at night. 

Just so you know I am not a particularly religious person and none of my beliefs come because of any religion.

I just don't care that someone's ancestors were held in slavery over 150 years ago before my ancestors were even in this country and in never owned any slaves. It is really too bad that other black people sold there fellow Africans into slavery to the Portuguese and Spanish 400 years ago. Again me my family had nothing to do with that.

I don't care if someone hundreds of years ago had slaves because back then it was a accepted practice back then and I don't hold it against their descendents because they did.

A male that has his penis removed and grows or has tits implanted is not now or ever going to be woman just as a female that has her boobs removed and uses hormones to grow a beard will never be a man. The biology. And there are only two genders and I don't give a shit about what pronoun one prefers to use. If you are male they are he and him an if you are a female they are she and her. Unless one walks around with a very small person in their pocket one person can never be a they or them. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.120  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.118    2 years ago
That's why you keep coming back for one more shot.

Too funny, some of "your friends" think that is "debating".

If they were smart they wouldn't take on so many losing arguments.

Mirror, mirror on the wall...

No, let's just say they've been lucky to have you as a friend.

320

Don't forget the big day in May.

The only two important days in May are Mother's Day & Memorial Day.  The rest are just global or international nonsense except for Cinco de Mayo.

  • May 1: May Day, National Lemonade Day , Mother Goose Day
  • May 2: International Harry Potter Day, National Brothers and Sisters Day
  • May 3: National Teacher Day, Paranormal Day, Constitution Memorial Day, Eid al-Fitr
  • May 4: Star Wars Day
  • May 5: Cinco de Mayo, National Astronaut Day, National Day of Prayer, Hoagie Day
  • May6: National Space Day, National No Pants Day, Nurses Day, International No Diet Day
  • May7: World Fair Trade Day, National Fitness Day, International Astronomy Day, Free Comic Book Day
  • May 8: Mother's Day, National Women's Health Week, Coconut Cream Pie Day, Have a Coke Day
  • May9: National Moscato Day, Women's Checkup Day, Lost Sock Memorial Day
  • May10: National Clean Your Room Day, National Shrimp Day
  • May11: National Twilight Zone Day, Receptionists Day, Eat What You Want Day
  • May12: National Fibromyalgia Awareness Day, Nutty Fudge Day
  • May13: International Hummus Day, National Apple Pie Day, Crouton Day, Fruit Cocktail Day
  • May14: National Underground America Day, Buttermilk Biscuit Day, Dance Like a Chicken Day
  • May15: International Family Day, National Chocolate Chip Day, Peace Officers Memorial Day
  • May16: National Mimosa Day, National Barbecue Day, Do Something Good for Your Neighbor Day, Drawing Day
  • May17: National Cherry Cobbler Day, Walnut Day
  • May18: National Visit Relatives Day, HIV Vaccine Awareness Day
  • May19: National Devil's Food Cake Day, Barber Mental Health Awareness Day
  • May20: National Endangered Species Day, National Rescue Dog Day, Bike to Work Day, Pizza Party Day
  • May21: National Armed Forces Day, National American Red Cross Founder's Day, Talk Like Yoda Day, National Waitstaff Day, World Whiskey Day
  • May22: World Paloma Day, National Maritime Day, International Day of Biological Diversity, Harvey Milk Day
  • May23: National Taffy Day, Turtle Day, Lucky Penny Day
  • May24: National Brother's Day
  • May25: May Revolution Day, National Wine Day
  • May26: National Blueberry Cheesecake Day, Paper Airplane Day
  • May27: National Road Trip Day, Sunscreen Day, Heat Awareness Day
  • May28: National Brisket Day, Hamburger Day
  • May29: National Paperclip Day
  • May 30: Memorial Day, National Mint Julep Day, National Creativity Day
  • May 31: National Macaroon Day, Smile Day
May Holidays and Observances in 2022 - Special Days in May (countryliving.com)

Thanks for the reminder when you are obviously so very busy this week!

  • December 26:   National Whiners Day, Boxing Day, National Candy Cane Day
  • December 27:   National Fruitcake Day, Make Cut-Out Snowflakes Day
  • December 28:   National Card Playing Day, National Chocolate Candy Day
  • December 29:   Tick Tock Day, International Cello Day, Still Need To Do Day
  • December 30:   Bacon Day, National Resolution Planning Day
  • December 31:   New Year's Eve, Make Up Your Mind Day, National Champagne Day
December Holidays and Observances (thespruce.com)
 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.121  Split Personality  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.119    2 years ago
Just so you know I am not a particularly religious person and none of my beliefs come because of any religion.

Look around you, there are religious signs everywhere, even our laws are based in religious beliefs.

I just don't care that someone's ancestors were held in slavery over 150 years ago before my ancestors were even in this country and in never owned any slaves. It is really too bad that other black people sold there fellow Africans into slavery to the Portuguese and Spanish 400 years ago. Again me my family had nothing to do with that. I don't care if someone hundreds of years ago had slaves because back then it was a accepted practice back then and I don't hold it against their descendents because they did.

I don't care about your opinions, we live in a society that believes in pooling risk.

My insurance premiums go up for insurance companies' losses that had nothing to do with me.  My taxes go up for crimes and damages I was not party to.  Laws are enacted daily that have zero to do with my reality but here we are.

A male that has his penis removed and grows or has tits implanted is not now or ever going to be woman just as a female that has her boobs removed and uses hormones to grow a beard will never be a man. The biology. And there are only two genders and I don't give a shit about what pronoun one prefers to use. If you are male they are he and him an if you are a female they are she and her. Unless one walks around with a very small person in their pocket one person can never be a they or them.

Again, your opinions are your own and have nothing to do with the souls of other people and what they believe.  Biology doesn't always align with the soul.  Chances are very very high that you have had some sort of interaction with one of these people and it didn't change your life at all. The world simply doesn't care about your anger over issues that don't affect you.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.122  arkpdx  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.121    2 years ago
Biology doesn't always align with the soul. 

Biology is reality and science. I thought all you lefties believed in science or is it only the parts of science that agree with your opinions. I also didn't think liberals believed in the soul since it was a religious concept. 

Yes I know it is only your opinions and those of liberals that count and mine and those of other conservatives are to be ignored. I just wonder who made you all decider of all things. 

One other thing. I and others alive today can not be punished for the actions of those in the past. It is in the Constitution. So reparations for slavery would be unconstitutional. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.123  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.122    2 years ago
Biology is reality and science.

Do you believe that men and women think alike or differently? Do you believe that human emotion and thought processes are the exact same regardless of gender and thus if you could swap the brains between a male and female, the female brain in a male body now be "male" and think like a male and vice versus? If so then it would make sense that gender is only determined by the genitals. Whatever the genitals, a persons thinking, emotions, feelings, self-awareness, likes, dislikes, etc. will always match their genitals.

Of course any rational person with more than half a brain knows that's complete bullshit. Women and men think very differently, to the point where some joked they're from different planets. The reality, the biology, the science and the facts all show that there is a wide mix of effeminate males and masculine females, masculine males, feminine females as well as those who don't feel they fit in either feminine or masculine and those who feel they are both. These are facts. Just because some conservative half wits are apparently too stupid to understand that there can be more than just the two gender definitions they were indoctrinated to believe in doesn't mean that the wide variety of gender identities that have proclaimed their own existence don't actually exist.

You claim that conservatives opinions are ignored, but the reality is that it's conservatives who are ignoring the voices of millions and denying the very existence of those people who don't "fit" the conservatives narrow doctrinal definition of "male" and "female". Many of these conservatives proclaim its their God that defines such things which is of course them passing on the blame for being monumental morons incapable of understanding the fact that gender throughout what they see as "creation" is full of gender fluidity, thousands of creatures that flip back and forth between whichever gender is needed for their species survival and thousands of creatures that display homosexual or bisexual behaviors.

"I just wonder who made you all decider of all things."

That's rich coming from the side that is demanding there are only two genders and that it's decided at birth by the genitals most prominent, to hell with chromosomes, gonadal or ovarian tissue existing together, varying hormone levels, hermaphrodites and pseudohermaphrodites. The only difference is that conservatives made themselves the "deciders of all things" a long time ago and are now just pissed off that their bronze age archaic useless opinions are now being challenged.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.124  arkpdx  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.123    2 years ago
there are only two genders and that it's decided at birth by the genitals most prominent, 

That is absolutely factual whether you like it or not. (Look it up. It science)

to hell with chromosomes, 

It is the chromosomes that determine what type of genitals one has. (Look it up. It science)

hermaphrodites and pseudohermaphrodites. 

Abnormalities and not frequent occurrences in any case. There have only been less than 1000 case of hermaphroditism ever recorded. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.3.125  Jack_TX  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.123    2 years ago
The reality, the biology, the science and the facts all show that there is a wide mix of effeminate males and masculine females, masculine males, feminine females as well as those who don't feel they fit in either feminine or masculine and those who feel they are both.

Yes.  There are masculine males.  Or less masculine males.  Or feminine females. etc.  So they're either male or female.  That's biology, BTW.  

Now, you can bitch all you want to about the concept of "real men" or "barbie dolls" or whatever and talk about the social stigmas that tend to follow people who deviate from those classical norms, fine.  But that doesn't change biology.  It doesn't change DNA or skeletal structures or any of the other actual science. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
1.3.126  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.124    2 years ago
Abnormalities and not frequent occurrences in any case.

So I take it that because they are a small group we should deny their existence and treat them like freaks? Only indoctrinated self-righteous assholes could be so heartless.

There have only been less than 1000 case of hermaphroditism ever recorded.

First, that clearly doesn't represent that actual numbers of it happening throughout human history. But even if true hermaphroditism, with both fully formed genitals, is extremely rare, pseudohermaphrodites exist in much larger numbers.

Define pseudohermaphrodite

Pseudohermaphrodite refers to someone whose external genitalia are not consistent with his or her gonadal sex. A male pseudohermaphrodite, for example, has a 46XY   karyotype   and   testes   but has either   ambiguous genitalia   or a complete female phenotype. Most often this results from genetic disorders of   testosterone   biosynthetic enzymes, the   androgen receptor   or the 5-a-reductase enzyme; the severity of the phenotype depends on the severity of the genetic defect. A female pseudohermaphrodite, in contrast, has a 46XX karyotype and ovaries but has ambiguous external genitalia. The most common cause of this is   congenital adrenal hyperplasia, which results in   virilization   of the female fetus in utero.

Guevedoces

Suppose you were a 12-year-old girl living in an isolated village in the Dominican Republic. You had been worried for a while that your breasts had not begun to grow and you had not shown any signs of menstruating like some of your friends. Still more frightening were the two lumps appearing under your partially fused labia majora, along with the noticeable increase in the size of your clitoris. Another revelation was that you began to be interested sexually in girls. You are then told that you belong to a group of similar people in your village that have been called   Guevedoces   (penis at 12). The Guevedoces syndrome is relatively common in several isolated, remote villages in the Dominican Republic and a few other places in the world. These children, most often raised as girls, are actually male!

Pseudohermaphroditism

A pseudohermaphrodite   is a person whose gonads are consistent with the chromosomal sex but who has external genitalia of the opposite sex. Male pseudohermaphrodites have normal testes but incomplete masculinization of the wolffian duct system and external genitalia. One form of this condition is the inherited disorder   androgen insensitivity syndrome   (AIS), also called   testicular feminization syndrome   ( Figure 5.9 ). These individuals have normal testes and male chromosomes (46:XY), and their testes secrete normal amounts of testosterone. However, they have a genetic absence of the receptors for androgens in target tissues. Thus, they develop female-like external genitalia, the testes are not descended, and wolffian duct structures (epididymis, vas deferens, and seminal vesicles) do not develop.

These individuals show a range of incomplete masculinization of the reproductive ducts and external genitalia. Often they are born with ambiguous genitalia (a very small penis and empty scrotum). Their urethra may fail to close during development, resulting in an opening on the lower surface of the penis, a condition called hypospadias.

Pseudohermaphroditism - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

There are so many variations of genetic receptors, chromosomes, hypospadias, testosterone, testicular atrophy, hypogonadism and more that determine what a persons gender is and who they are as a human. Trying to claim otherwise is just sad intentional stupidity.

Not XX and not XY one in 1,666 births
Klinefelter ( XXY ) one in 1,000 births
Androgen insensitivity syndrome one in 13,000 births
Partial androgen insensitivity syndrome one in 130,000 births
Classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia one in 13,000 births
Late onset adrenal hyperplasia one in 66 individuals
Vaginal agenesis one in 6,000 births
Ovotestes one in 83,000 births
Idiopathic (no discernable medical cause) one in 110,000 births
Iatrogenic (caused by medical treatment, for instance progestin administered to pregnant mother) no estimate
5 alpha reductase deficiency no estimate
Mixed gonadal dysgenesis no estimate
Complete gonadal dysgenesis one in 150,000 births
Hypospadias (urethral opening in perineum or along penile shaft) one in 2,000 births
Hypospadias (urethral opening between corona and tip of glans penis) one in 770 births

Total number of people whose bodies differ from standard male or female one in 100 births
Total number of people receiving surgery to “normalize” genital appearance one or two in 1,000 births

How common is intersex? | Intersex Society of North America (isna.org)

Seems there is far more ambiguity with human gender than conservatives are willing to admit, but then they've always shown themselves to be sore losers unwilling to admit when they are wrong, they just keep their big lies going and act as if no one notices.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.127  Split Personality  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.122    2 years ago
Biology is reality and science.

So are psychology & psychiatry.

I thought all you lefties believed in science or is it only the parts of science that agree with your opinions.

There you go thinking out loud again... do you deny the existence of souls?

I also didn't think liberals believed in the soul since it was a religious concept. 

Well wrong again, that's just another ignorant sweeping generalization that defies the participation of several religious liberal members here.  Let's just call it consciousness and leave it to be a fact that every consciousness is unique.  

Yes I know it is only your opinions and those of liberals that count and mine and those of other conservatives are to be ignored.

512

If that were true you wouldn't be allowed to comment here, would you?

I just wonder who made you all decider of all things. 

The same one that made you the decider of all things?

One other thing. I and others alive today can not be punished for the actions of those in the past.

So you don't believe in original sin either? You aren't paying your taxes?

It is in the Constitution. So reparations for slavery would be unconstitutional. 

Yawn.  The Constitution, the Bible, more words on paper like the Terms of Service here.

You agree with them to get by but you realize they can be stretched depending on the balance of power in SCOTUS or the other powers to be. 27 Amendments and counting. You know, the same SCOTUS that is now making public health and immigration policy.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.128  arkpdx  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.3.126    2 years ago

Shall we go through and talk about the more famous tranies who were neither hermaphrodites nor were they pseudohermaphrodites. Like Bruce Jenner, Jerrod Jennings, William Thomas. 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.129  JBB  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.128    2 years ago

The definition of prejudice is to unfairly assign negative traits to whole groups of people based on dislike of individuals...

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.130  arkpdx  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.127    2 years ago
deleted
Yawn. The Constitution, the Bible, more words on paper 

So you don't believe in the Constitution or the Bible. I didn't think so.

And I know you only like and respect SCOTUS when they uphold your rules. When they actually follow the Constitution you butch

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.131  arkpdx  replied to  JBB @1.3.129    2 years ago

Would you like to hear of liberal prejudices? 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.132  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @1.3.129    2 years ago
“As the nation, Negro and white, trembled with outrage at police brutality in the South, police misconduct in the North was rationalized, tolerated, and usually denied,” he wrote. Leaders in Northern and Western states “welcomed me to their cities, and showered praise on the heroism of Southern Negroes. Yet when the issues were joined concerning local conditions, only the language was polite; the rejection was firm and unequivocal.”  MLK Jr.
 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.133  Split Personality  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.131    2 years ago

Well yours are on full display

so go for it,

you appear to be "on a roll",

maybe you will feel better...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.134  JohnRussell  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.119    2 years ago

The government of the United States has been a continuing enterprise for 245 years.  Slavery was sanctioned by the government of the United States of America. 

But how about this - many conservatives are sure that we are burdening future generations with the national debt. But why should the generation a hundred years from now care about what happened before they were born?  After all, thats what you say. 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.135  JBB  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.131    2 years ago

Enlighten me since you are the woke one!

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.136  arkpdx  replied to  JBB @1.3.135    2 years ago

 Liberals have been saying all Christians are like those belonging to westboro baptist. They claim all Republicans are Nazis or white supremacists even though that is not true. I have been falsely accused as have other conservatives of being homophobic or transphobic which could not be further from the truth. I do not dear either group in fact I feel sorry for them that they have such a mental illness. I have been accused of being anti woman because I support the right to life for unborn babies.. 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.137  JBB  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.136    2 years ago

So, liberals are intolerant of intolerance?

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.138  arkpdx  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.134    2 years ago

Tell me why I should owe anyone today for what happened 150 years ago. Not to the government but to an individual person who was not alive then and has never been a slave. Should you be arrested and placed in prison because your great grandfather robed a bank and got away with it? No? Then why should I pay a price for someone being a slave that not only I had nothing to do with but none of my family did either. 

I will tell you what though if you can find someone that was born into slavery when it was legal and can prove it I will ok him or her getting reparations. The proof must be 100% verifiable 

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.139  arkpdx  replied to  JBB @1.3.137    2 years ago

That is the biggest bullshit answer of the decade. [deleted.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.140  arkpdx  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.130    2 years ago

Deleted

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.141  JohnRussell  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.138    2 years ago

Why should Americans 100 or 150 years from now pay off our debt? 

Using your logic, the whole national debt thing is bullshit. 

Unless the nation continues over centuries, which is exactly what happened with the issue of slavery. 

I dont say that blacks are individually owed money, but they are owed something. The United States of America made them second class citizens , along with the American Indians, from the beginning. 

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.3.142  arkpdx  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.141    2 years ago

Then you pay them out of your own pocket and leave mine alone if you feel that guilty for the actions of others. I do not. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.143  Split Personality  replied to  arkpdx @1.3.142    2 years ago

There is no guilt involved, nor is it necessary on your part. Or wanted.

Reparations to Native Americans have been on going and haven't hurt you or cost

you anything.  

American Indians  ha ve received three types of reparations : (1) cash payments, through the operation of the Indian Claims Commission and the U.S. Court of Claims; (2) land, through an occasional action of Congress to return control over land to particular tribes; and (3) tribal recognition, by either Congress or the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

"American Indian Reparations" by Ronald L. Trosper (November-December 1994 P&R Issue) - PRRAC — Connecting Research to Advocacy

Native American Reparations | History, Payments & Tribes - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

U.S. finalizes $3.4 billion settlement with American Indians

the CNN Wire Staff
Updated 9:58 AM EST, Tue November 27, 2012
So if you weren't aware of these legal reparations over the last several decades,
they haven't harmed you.  As a political act you and others similarly aggrieved
can "vote out the bums who approved this" but by that time the money is long
gone and hopefully a tiny bit of justice has been served.
The US Government also paid reparations to the Japanese Americans they
interned during WWII.
Don't move to Canada, they paid reparations to Italian Canadians they interned
during WWII and made even bigger settlements with fewer Native Americans
than the US did.
The Catholic Church which operated 70% of the 130 Native reeducation schools
pledged $25 million of which it raised $23.5 million from donations and only paid
$1.5 million out of pocket.  
I'm sure you would have enjoyed saying no to that donation, right?
As for the future, keep voting for like minded people.
Forget the past. You got yours.
Let's do away with FEMA while we are at it,  Each man/family for itself, 
fuck them if they live where there are tornados, flooding and hurricanes.
Yeah that's the ticket /S
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.144  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.143    2 years ago
Reparations to Native Americans have been on going and haven't hurt you or cost you anything.  

Where does the money come from?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.145  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.144    2 years ago

The same place that $900 hammers and $600 toilet seats come from?

The Treasury.

Which is funded annually by 47% of the public who pay income taxes.

In short the government prints the money you have faith in.

Court case after case has determined that the "harm done to an individual taxpayer"

does not rise to "standing".

[Plaintiff's] interest in the moneys of the Treasury -- partly realized from taxation and partly from other sources -- is shared with millions of others; is comparatively minute and indeterminable; and the effect upon future taxation, of any payment out of the funds, so remote, fluctuating and uncertain, that no basis is afforded for an appeal to the preventive powers of a court of equity.

The administration of any statute, likely to produce additional taxation to be imposed upon a vast number of taxpayers, the extent of whose several liability is indefinite and constantly changing, is essentially a matter of public and not of individual concern.

262 U.S. 447, 487 (U.S. 1923) . So not only was the injury alleged by the taxpayer plaintiffs too "minute and indeterminable," but the issue in the case was a "matter of public concern" --- a political matter. In other words, if you don't like the way your government is spending your tax money, you can vote the bums out. But disagreeing with the way government spends, even if it means you'll have to pay more in taxes later on, is not a sufficiently determinable injury for the courts to provide any remedy.

Can You Sue the Government For Wasting Your Tax Dollars? — L. Joe Dunman, Kentucky Attorney (joedunmanlaw.com)

Don't like it? Join the Goldwater Institute which sues the US Government regularly

(increasing your taxes) in many similar cases.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.146  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.145    2 years ago
In short the government prints the money you have faith in.

That's right.

We pay for it and our children will be paying for a lot more for it!

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.147  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.146    2 years ago

Welcome to Post WWII America.

We just paid that debt off during the Clinton Admin.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.148  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.145    2 years ago

You keep saying the Treasury. Whatever they do the taxpayers eventually have to pay the bill. That bill is enormous and will have to be paid by multiple generations.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.149  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.147    2 years ago

Clinton benefited from Reagan's growing economy. Clinton got the unexpected revenue from all that growth which paid off the deficit.

As for WWII, under Eisenhower the wealth paid 90% of their income so that we paid off WWII debt. That is how we used to do it!

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.3.150  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.149    2 years ago

Skipping right over GHW Bush now are we? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.151  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.3.150    2 years ago

He was a passenger, never a pilot.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.152  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @1.3.150    2 years ago

Well don’t you skip over Bush also, fill us in JBB.

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
1.3.153  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.152    2 years ago

I have a delightful article/blog/rant/discussion that I wrote today to ring in 2023 with a twist of sour wisdom. If you get time, it's at:

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.154  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.148    2 years ago
You keep saying the Treasury.

Yes, I do.

Whatever they do the taxpayers eventually have to pay the bill. 

So the fines and interest from Dept of Energy investments don't count?

All the drug busts and confiscated shit they auction off is meaningless.

That bill is enormous and will have to be paid by multiple generations.

The same as every other generation, especially worse since Reagan who believed the deficits and national debt were meaningless.

What Ronald Reagan Really Did to US Debt | Gold News (bullionvault.com)

and this blast from the past, makes one weepy for a dcent deficit.

The Reagan Budget: The Deficit that Didn't Have to Be | Cato Institute

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.155  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.154    2 years ago

Fines and interest?

Paying off the national debt?

It was Reagan's fault?

I don't think I even need to bother with that.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.156  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.154    2 years ago
So the fines and interest from Dept of Energy investments don't count? All the drug busts and confiscated shit they auction off is meaningless.

What percentage of federal revenue do these generate, that will determine the amount of meaning.

The same as every other generation, especially worse since Reagan who believed the deficits and nation debt were meaningless.

Not the same as our debt is growing exponentially.  Reagan’s administration ended 34 years ago.  Reagan didn’t approve any Budget that the Dem controlled House didn’t agree to.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.157  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.149    2 years ago
Clinton benefited from Reagan's growing economy. Clinton got the unexpected revenue from all that growth which paid off the deficit.

Sorry Vic.  Regan and GHW Bush combined to grow the national debt to 4 times what Carter left behind. 

You remember GHW Bush don't you, the POTUS between Reagan and Clinton,

The guy that said "no new taxes".

Clinton inherited that debt.

The deficit is a different concept and while Clinton had a few months of flat or negative deficit, nothing was "paid off".

As for WWII, under Eisenhower the wealth paid 90% of their income so that we paid off WWII debt. That is how we used to do it!

Ahh, the nostalgia for the 50's is palpable but our WWII debt wasn't paid off until the

Clinton Admin. 

(Actually the debt never gets paid off until the last veteran of WWII

passes and China, Iran and Russia/USSR/Russia still owes us a trillion dollars for WWII)

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.158  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.157    2 years ago

Yes, US debt in 1992 was $5T. Today it is over $31T.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.159  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.158    2 years ago

Where oh where are we headed with this?

From 1981 to 1992 ( REgan & Bush 41)the debt quadrupled. to$4T ( in todays dollars $8.4T )

Clinton "only " added $1T in 8 years.

Bush 43 added $6 T and didn't even account for the War on Terror; he was at the helm when the housing market crashed and then a global meltdown occurred causing Obama to add another $8T in 8 years.

Mr Trump managed to add $7T in 4 years.  

Afghanistan is the gift that keeps on giving /S

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.160  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.156    2 years ago

( I answered from a laptop that froze up and now I see my answer is gone.)

To summarize; in 1934 corporate taxes and personal income taxes produced roughly the same amount of income to the Treasury but the excise tax and "other category" provided the lion's share of revenue.

That has completely flipped now starting with WWII. 

Now individual income tax and employer payroll taxes produce 82% of our revenue, excise & misc is less than 7% now.  Corporate income tax has been all over but now only 11%.

Table 2. Federal Government Receipts by Source, Percent of Total, 1934 – 2018

Fiscal Year Individual Income Taxes Corporate Income Taxes Social Insurance and Retirement Receipts Excise Taxes Other
1934 14.2% 12.3% 1.0% 45.8% 26.7%
1935 14.6% 14.7% 0.9% 39.9% 30.0%
1936 17.2% 18.3% 1.3% 41.6% 21.6%
1937 20.3% 19.3% 10.8% 34.8% 14.9%
1938 19.0% 19.1% 22.8% 27.6% 11.5%
1939 16.3% 17.9% 25.3% 29.7% 10.7%
1940 13.6% 18.3% 27.3% 30.2% 10.7%
1941 15.1% 24.4% 22.3% 29.3% 9.0%
1942 22.3% 32.2% 16.8% 23.2% 5.5%
1943 27.1% 39.8% 12.7% 17.1% 3.3%
1944 45.0% 33.9% 7.9% 10.9% 2.2%
1945 40.7% 35.4% 7.6% 13.9% 2.4%
1946 41.0% 30.2% 7.9% 17.8% 3.1%
1947 46.6% 22.4% 8.9% 18.7% 3.5%
1948 46.5% 23.3% 9.0% 17.7% 3.5%
1949 39.5% 28.4% 9.6% 19.0% 3.5%
1950 39.9% 26.5% 11.0% 19.1% 3.4%
1951 41.9% 27.3% 11.0% 16.8% 3.1%
1952 42.2% 32.1% 9.7% 13.4% 2.6%
1953 42.8% 30.5% 9.8% 14.2% 2.7%
1954 42.4% 30.3% 10.3% 14.3% 2.7%
1955 43.9% 27.3% 12.0% 14.0% 2.8%
1956 43.2% 28.0% 12.5% 13.3% 3.0%
1957 44.5% 26.5% 12.5% 13.2% 3.3%
1958 43.6% 25.2% 14.1% 13.4% 3.7%
1959 46.3% 21.8% 14.8% 13.3% 3.7%
1960 44.0% 23.2% 15.9% 12.6% 4.2%
1961 43.8% 22.2% 17.4% 12.6% 4.0%
1962 45.7% 20.6% 17.1% 12.6% 4.0%
1963 44.7% 20.3% 18.6% 12.4% 4.1%
1964 43.2% 20.9% 19.5% 12.2% 4.2%
1965 41.8% 21.8% 19.0% 12.5% 4.9%
1966 42.4% 23.0% 19.5% 10.0% 5.1%
1967 41.3% 22.8% 21.9% 9.2% 4.7%
1968 44.9% 18.7% 22.2% 9.2% 5.0%
1969 46.7% 19.6% 20.9% 8.1% 4.7%
1970 46.9% 17.0% 23.0% 8.1% 4.9%
1971 46.1% 14.3% 25.3% 8.9% 5.4%
1972 45.7% 15.5% 25.4% 7.5% 6.0%
1973 44.7% 15.7% 27.3% 7.0% 5.2%
1974 45.2% 14.7% 28.5% 6.4% 5.2%
1975 43.9% 14.6% 30.3% 5.9% 5.4%
1976 44.2% 13.9% 30.5% 5.7% 5.8%
TQ 47.8% 10.4% 31.0% 5.5% 5.3%
1977 44.3% 15.4% 29.9% 4.9% 5.3%
1978 45.3% 15.0% 30.3% 4.6% 4.8%
1979 47.0% 14.2% 30.0% 4.0% 4.8%
1980 47.2% 12.5% 30.5% 4.7% 5.1%
1981 47.7% 10.2% 30.5% 6.8% 4.8%
1982 48.2% 8.0% 32.6% 5.9% 5.3%
1983 48.1% 6.2% 34.8% 5.9% 5.0%
1984 44.8% 8.5% 35.9% 5.6% 5.2%
1985 45.6% 8.4% 36.1% 4.9% 5.0%
1986 45.4% 8.2% 36.9% 4.3% 5.2%
1987 46.0% 9.8% 35.5% 3.8% 4.9%
1988 44.1% 10.4% 36.8% 3.9% 4.8%
1989 45.0% 10.4% 36.3% 3.5% 4.9%
1990 45.2% 9.1% 36.8% 3.4% 5.4%
1991 44.3% 9.3% 37.5% 4.0% 4.8%
1992 43.6% 9.2% 37.9% 4.2% 5.1%
1993 44.2% 10.2% 37.1% 4.2% 4.4%
1994 43.1% 11.2% 36.7% 4.4% 4.6%
1995 43.7% 11.6% 35.8% 4.3% 4.6%
1996 45.2% 11.8% 35.1% 3.7% 4.2%
1997 46.7% 11.5% 34.2% 3.6% 4.0%
1998 48.1% 11.0% 33.2% 3.3% 4.4%
1999 48.1% 10.1% 33.5% 3.9% 4.4%
2000 49.6% 10.2% 32.2% 3.4% 4.5%
2001 49.9% 7.6% 34.9% 3.3% 4.3%
2002 46.3% 8.0% 37.8% 3.6% 4.3%
2003 44.5% 7.4% 40.0% 3.8% 4.3%
2004 43.0% 10.1% 39.0% 3.7% 4.2%
2005 43.1% 12.9% 36.9% 3.4% 3.8%
2006 43.4% 14.7% 34.8% 3.1% 4.0%
2007 45.3% 14.4% 33.9% 2.5% 3.9%
2008 45.4% 12.1% 35.7% 2.7% 4.2%
2009 43.5% 6.6% 42.3% 3.0% 4.7%
2010 41.5% 8.9% 40.0% 3.1% 6.5%
2011 47.4% 7.9% 35.5% 3.1% 6.1%
2012 46.2% 9.9% 34.5% 3.2% 6.2%
2013 estimate 45.5% 10.6% 35.1% 3.1% 5.7%
2014 estimate 45.6% 11.0% 34.0% 3.5% 6.0%
2015 estimate 46.6% 11.3% 32.6% 3.4% 6.2%
2016 estimate 47.7% 11.3% 32.6% 3.2% 5.2%
2017 estimate 49.0% 11.4% 32.4% 3.1% 4.0%
2018 estimate 49.8% 11.3% 32.2% 3.1% 3.6%

I remember the first new car I financed had a $300.00 Federal Excise tax.

Not sure which party did away with that but they are both guilty of passing annual budgets for even the worst of our recent Presidents.

Reagan didn’t approve any Budget that the Dem controlled House didn’t agree to.

Isn't that a wry attempt at whataboutism?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.161  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.159    2 years ago

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the only or even the primary variable in our national debt was who is president.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.3.162  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.161    2 years ago

An economist named Mason once pointed out the difference between

the "primary debt" and the "absolute debt" using a graph

where the difference in spread was the interest rate. 

He was trying to help "fix" Reagans' legacy.

Instead, Congress, regardless of protests or self-protestations has seemed to have

resolved itself to view the debt as an interest only mortgage.

As long as we pay the interest, they seem fine with the status quo

regardless of the primary debt balance.

Any one with the balls to tackle the debt seriously will end up as a one term wonder.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.163  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.162    2 years ago
He was trying to help "fix" Reagans' legacy.

Fix it?  Didn’t President Obama identify Reagan as a transformational president, ending the Cold War, ended the Carter ‘malaise’ and set the stage for our growth in the 90’s.

In 1988, US debt was 50% of GDP, today it’s 138%. 

Any one with the balls to tackle the debt seriously will end up as a one term wonder.

Unfortunately, you are right, Americans are addicted to ‘free’ chicken.



 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
1.4  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 years ago
Even the Cambridge Dictionary has bowed to the radical left.

You realize that they haven't changed the definition of woman right?  They've simply added a new one based on how the word is being used.  Languages are constantly evolving.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
1.4.1  arkpdx  replied to  SteevieGee @1.4    2 years ago

A new one wasn't needed. A woman is and always will be a female human being. One being female is determined by genetics and one having XX chromosomes and not by someone cutting a man's penis off. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.4.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  SteevieGee @1.4    2 years ago
You realize that they haven't changed the definition of woman right?

And you realize we now have a Supreme Court Justice who can't even define what a woman is.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
1.4.3  Jasper2529  replied to  SteevieGee @1.4    2 years ago
ou realize that they haven't changed the definition of woman right?  They've simply added a new one based on how the word is being used. 

There was no need to add a "new" definition of a woman or man, since genetic science hasn't changed. 

Languages are constantly evolving.

To a point, you're correct. However (again), biology of XX/XY has not changed. Someone's "feelings" are not scientific data.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
1.4.4  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.4.2    2 years ago

That was a whopper!

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.4.5  Split Personality  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.4.3    2 years ago
  • To a point, you're correct.

Of course.

  • However (again), biology of XX/XY has not changed

Of course.

  • Someone's "feelings" are not scientific data.

They are to the psychologists and psychiatrists who have to evaluate the people

who are seeking to transition, in fact, many people spend more money on that

phase of their journey than hormone therapy or surgery.

The surgeon's job has now become the easiest part of the transition,

so much so, that many like Papillon seek to control the whole process,

like a general contractor.

As far as public approval is concerned, none is needed.

The Cambridge Dictionary is no different than Twitter.

Your right to be annoyed by the world outside your door is protected by the

same Amendments that allow the right to privacy to us all.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.4.6  Split Personality  replied to  Split Personality @1.4.5    2 years ago

Taking issue with definitions and how people define themselves is somewhat hypocritical of believers

in the Abrahamic religions many of whom care too much about their soul's sinful travels to heaven.

These people who seek surgery to change their genders are trying to match their soul to their current

physical condition.

In the Dharmik tradition of reincarnation (Hindu, Sikh, Janis, Budha) a person's soul

can come back as a different gender or even a different species.

The soul has no DNA.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.4.7  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.4.4    2 years ago
That was a whopper!

With Cheese!

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.4.8  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.4.7    2 years ago

American Cheese?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
2  Greg Jones    2 years ago

Just as I won't bow to being forced to use the metric system, I never accept or accommodate this gender identity fantasy some mixed up people have and call an obvious male "she"  It's a mental and emotional problem with them.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
2.1  afrayedknot  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago

“It's a mental and emotional problem with them.”

Too sad that some will not, can not comprehend that the ‘mental and emotional problem’ lies solely within themselves.

How does one choosing to identify oneself have any meaningful, substantive impact on your life?

Absolutely none, unless of course, your moral definitions must apply to all others. Not here. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
2.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1    2 years ago

The problem is not with their bodies or sexual characteristics, but their mental and emotional perception of said characteristics.

They feel they are in the wrong body and desire to change it. This small percentage of the population has been pretty consistent over the years.

So what's happened in the last few years. It seems like "transitioning" has become the latest fad of the left.

Thus, numbers of kids are being falsely instructed and groomed to go through with life changing procedures that are permanent, instead of being counseled to accept themselves as they are.

So yes, it's an emotional and mental problem, one which most children grow out of.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.1.2  Tacos!  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1.1    2 years ago
their mental and emotional perception of said characteristics

Do you ever consider why that might be?

They feel they are in the wrong body and desire to change it.

Simply calling it a desire makes it sound like an insignificant choice - like which jeans to wear while doing yard work.

For every one I know who has gone through this, it has been the most difficult, complicated, and challenging process of their lives. I think it’s kind of shitty for other people - strangers, really - to dismiss it as some kind of trendy choice or judge it as a moral perversion. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.1.4  Tacos!  replied to  Have Opinion Will Travel @2.1.3    2 years ago

Aww, what’s the matter? Are you afraid you might get something on you?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.5  Jack_TX  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1    2 years ago
How does one choosing to identify oneself have any meaningful, substantive impact on your life?

Me personally?  It doesn't.... until batshit angry leftists start yelling at everybody for "misgendering" or some other such bullshit.

But I'm not a female athlete.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.6  JBB  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.5    2 years ago

In real life do batshit leftist often yell at you for misgendering?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Have Opinion Will Travel @2.1.3    2 years ago

No problem!  Let me know your general location, I would RATHER AVOID YOU THAN "THEM"

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1.1    2 years ago

NO GROOMING GOING ON AS YOU ALLUDE TO

SIMPLY THE WORLD IS NOT SO BLACK AND WHITE AS THE NARROW MINDED FOLKS WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE

WHAT IS WRONG WITH PROMOTING TOLERANCE AND DIVERSITY AND ACCEPTANCE?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.8    2 years ago

SORRY FOR MY ALL CAPS OR ALL LOWER CASE COMMENTS

NOT USED TO USING A LAPTOP.  I AM A TYPIST AND THIS KEYBOARD DOES NOT AGREE WITH ME

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
2.1.10  arkpdx  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1    2 years ago
choosing to identify oneself 

What do you think would happen if you identified yourself as a Navy admiral. Would you expect everyone else to accept that? What do you think happens when you self identify as a police officer and act on it  when you are not? 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.1.12  Split Personality  replied to  Have Opinion Will Travel @2.1.3    2 years ago
 No one should be required to indulge someone's mental illness.

Wrong a million times over. 

There, fixed it for you.

I sure as hell won't.  Keep them the fuck away from me

Wonderful attitude /s

You probably would not even be aware if you met one.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.1.14  Tacos!  replied to  Have Opinion Will Travel @2.1.11    2 years ago
Fear? I’ll assume that’s an attempt to be humorous

No, it’s actually an honest question based on your own words. You, very emotionally, insisted that people be kept away from you. So, serious question: What are you so afraid of?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago
Just as I won't bow to being forced to use the metric system

I assume you never plan on leaving this country on vacation or anything then.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
2.2.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2    2 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.1    2 years ago
Yep! 

Too bad.  You'll miss out on a lot of amazing sites to see and history to enjoy.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
2.2.3  arkpdx  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2.2    2 years ago

There are more than enough sites and history to see in this country to occupy a lifetime and more. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2.4  Ozzwald  replied to  arkpdx @2.2.3    2 years ago
There are more than enough sites and history to see in this country to occupy a lifetime and more.

You are not incorrect, but remember our ancestors migrated to America, so our history includes parts outside our borders.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.5  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.1    2 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2.6  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.5    2 years ago
I NEVER HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OZZ

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.3  Tacos!  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago
Just as I won't bow to being forced to use the metric system

You already do. In lots of ways. If you buy a 2-liter bottle of soda. If you take medicine measured in milligrams or cubic centimeters. If you ever run in a 10K. If you buy booze. If you consume electricity by the kilowatt. Dental floss is sold by the meter. Car engines - even in American cars - are most commonly marketed by their liter displacement.

The metric system is all around you, and you are hip deep in it (about a meter) whether you like it or not.

an obvious male

Interesting. What do you think makes it obvious? And why is obviousness an important factor?

I would say most people pursue changes in their gendered lives because something about them is not obvious.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.3.1  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @2.3    2 years ago

Wine and liquor products commonly sold in 750ml bottles, LOL...

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.3.2  shona1  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.1    2 years ago

Morning split...we changed to metric years ago and it's way easier to work out than imperial...you soon get use to it and think nothing of it..

Now we just need to educate you mob in spelling...meter is metre...liter is litre...heck you mob will be speaking and spelling like us Aussies in no time ..🦘

Hope you are not snowed in..blue sky, sun and time to hit the waves here..🦈🦈

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.3.3  Split Personality  replied to  shona1 @2.3.2    2 years ago

Texas, 3 days ago 80 degrees, blown away by a southern storm system that brought several tornados and dropped the temps to low 60's during the day, but 30's overnight.

Tonight was the first time I had to disconnect hoses and dump vulnerable water bowls for the critters.

 

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.3.4  shona1  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.3    2 years ago

Ummm why do you have to dump water bowls??

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.3.5  Split Personality  replied to  shona1 @2.3.4    2 years ago

We have Ducks and outside cats in addition to the birds squirrels and occasional

turtle who expects strawberries. Some of the Mexican bowls and birdbaths are pricey

Talavera clay and break if the water freezes.  Stainless and plastic usually fare well.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3.6  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  shona1 @2.3.2    2 years ago

Morning Shona. Don't forget you folks say aluminium while we say aluminum.

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.3.7  shona1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3.6    2 years ago

Morning Ed...yes I use to work for Alcoa..we soon educated the Americans that came over here..

Had them spelling the same way as us and filing the same way...none of this year first then the month etc.. it's always month then the year eg 19/12/22.

And we converted them to Vegemite.. our greatest achievement..

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.3.8  Split Personality  replied to  shona1 @2.3.7    2 years ago

We saved England with Spam, Lol !!!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3.9  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  shona1 @2.3.7    2 years ago

Tried Vegemite when I lived in Christchurch, New Zealand and could never get used to the taste. Kiwis told me it was just like peanut butter. Not even close! Got to a acquired taste one is raised with.😏

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3.10  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.8    2 years ago

Yep.

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.3.11  shona1  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.5    2 years ago

Morning split..that's quite funny actually. You have to tip out the water to stop it freezing and breaking the bowls.

We have to fill up the water bowls and dishes so birds and animals have something to drink and survive the heat..

I have four birdbaths etc and have to fill them every day as all the water sources dry up now.

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.3.12  shona1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3.9    2 years ago

The Kiwi's lied..

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3.13  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  shona1 @2.3.12    2 years ago

They certainly did!

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.3.14  shona1  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.3.13    2 years ago

Just had toasted muffin with butter and Vegemite... bliss..🐨

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.3.15  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  shona1 @2.3.14    2 years ago

To each their own.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.4  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago
Just as I won't bow to being forced to use the metric system, ...

Good grief, what a pointless objection.   We all must use systems that we did not invent for natural language, weights, measurements, time, counting, typing, ....   Big deal.   The more fluent one is in these systems, the more personally capable one is as an individual.   In contrast, stubborn refusal of systems that are in effect and widely used simply makes an individual less capable (more backward) relative to others.

You are used to our English base 12 system for time and measurements yet you also use our decimal system for arithmetic which is based on 10.   The metric system is base 10; it is a natural for a base 10 arithmetic system.

But you proudly and stubbornly declare that you "will not bow to being forced" to use a well-established system that works much better with the other systems you already know and use.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.5  Split Personality  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago

Are people all over the world who reject Christ or Budha mental?

Does it affect the quality of your life, no, not a single bit.

So ranting about the metric system or the British Imperial system makes not a whit of difference to you 

(unless you owned an old British car which American socket sets never quite fit in which case you can borrow mine, sometimes metric fits by accident, in which case you can borrow those also. I also have gold plated award tools which you cannot borrow)jrSmiley_55_smiley_image.gif

The British call the hood of a car a bonnet and the deck lid a boot; who cares?

Who is harmed?

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.5.1  shona1  replied to  Split Personality @2.5    2 years ago

We do the same..boot and bonnet all the way..

Actually have to clean my car..got cat paw prints all over the wind screen, thanks for the reminder...

Deck lid that's a good one, that had me stumped...

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.5.2  Split Personality  replied to  shona1 @2.5.1    2 years ago

I had an Austin Healy and a couple of other pre 1970 fine British iron horses with

demisters

( triangular vent windows )jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

which were crucial to defogging the inside of the windscreen in bad weather.

Not a one had a blower motor worth a darn that could clear the windscreen or heat the car interior.

Ahh, youth.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.5.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Split Personality @2.5.2    2 years ago

Had a friend in the early 70's who owned a 1960 Austin Healy "Bug Eyed" Sprite. He had the same complaints you mentioned. It was a fun car to work on though. I recall he had the engine rebuilt after he got it and had to pull the head off the engine. He laughed when he stood right over the front of the engine and lifted the head right off by himself bare handed and unassisted!

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
2.5.4  1stwarrior  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.5.3    2 years ago

Wuz one of those Brit car owners - '58 Healey Bug-Eyed Sprite, 60 Healey 100-6, 64 MGB, '68 MGB-GT, Triumph TR3/TR6, '60 XK-150 (damn, wish I had any of those cars now).

Like your friend, it was nothing unusual for a few friends and I, after a 6-pack of Schlitz each, to change/repair the engine or transmission starting at 9:00 pm and finishing at 3:00 am on any of our Brit cars - no hoists, hands on, using crescent wrenches/metric tools, laughing and thrilled when the motor just kicked over and out the garage we went.

One bud "tried" to fit a Camaro engine into a Healey 3000 - found out that the transmission was "too short" - but we did it by hand and kept the Healey engine instead.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.5.5  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @2.5.4    2 years ago

67 Mark 3

Had to change the clutch, pulled the transmission out through the interior by myself.

Sold it in the 90's to put a downpayment on a house outside of PI

Saw it 2o years later, basically untouched except for a new power brake booster

and the same guy who bought it for $8K wanted $70K

A friend from the car club reminded me that "no one NEEDS an Austin Healy"

LMAO,  Man I miss that piece of ....

they were always breaking, but very easy to work on.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.6  Thrawn 31  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago

Lol really? The metric system is your hill? That’s dumb, the metric system is far superior to the “standard” system (and we are like the only country that still uses that idiotic system). Seriously, what do you have against the metric system? It is based upon factors of 10, makes complete sense, and is easy to remember. Even the country that created the standard system decided it was retarded and went metric. 

Not to mention you use the metric system all the time even in the us. Take a look at your drink and medication labels. I am only okay with the standard system because I have had to memorize it and am just familiar with it, but I would be totally cool with dumping it and going metric. 

FFS 12 inches in a foot? 3 feet in a yard? And my absolute favorite, 5,280 feet in a mile? What the fuck kinda Mickey Mouse shit is that?

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
2.7  cjcold  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago

Sorry mam didn't mean to annoy you.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
2.8  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago

I never accept or accommodate this gender identity fantasy some mixed up people have

Too funny.  90% of the time you probably wouldn’t even recognize it if you saw it.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.8.1  Split Personality  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.8    2 years ago

exactly!

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
2.9  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Greg Jones @2    2 years ago

Oh, thank you for that blistering "clarification," I am now converting to the GOP (Government of Putin).

 
 
 
Wishful_thinkin
Freshman Silent
5  Wishful_thinkin    2 years ago

Great, now we don't have to call anyone what they want to be called.  I can call anyone on here whatever I want to and not by their screen name.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
6  Tacos!    2 years ago
Yet Cambridge now says the definition of woman is, "An adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth"

Boy is this misleading. Cambridge has added a new definition. They did not replace the old one. As any grade school child knows, dictionaries include multiple definitions for a given word. The primary - and therefore, most used and preferred - definition of “woman” in the Cambridge Dictionary can be found online here , and reads as follows:

an adult female human being

See? There is no great gender crisis in English dictionaries. Nevertheless, as I have observed elsewhere on this site, political partisans will exaggerate anything to levels of cosmic bullshit if it gets people excited about voting for their party.

As hard as I try, it is difficult not to bring up Orwell these days.

Um, yeah. People always say that about bringing up Hitler, too. In both cases, people should try harder.

At first, these liturgic declarations of one's "pronouns" seemed relatively harmless to me.

Good. They are.

And, not that it matters much, but I've been perfectly willing to refer to adults in whatever manner they desire. It's a free country. Pursue your happiness.

I don’t believe you because every other sentiment expressed in this article is the very opposite of a “live and let live” philosophy.

dangerous euphemisms like "gender-affirming care,"

Dangerous to whom? If you don’t want gender-affirming care, don’t get it. If someone else does, that’s not your business.

And in their never-ending campaign to smear political opponents . . .

. . . Says the person who has already misrepresented his source; referred to people he disagrees with as “dangerous,” a “mob,” and bullies; and felt compelled to cite Orwell.

I simply refuse to accept that most Americans, or even more than a small percentage, believe children or should be empowered to "choose" their sex.

Where are they empowered to choose their own sex? What doctor is performing sex reassignment surgery on a child based solely on the choice that kid expressed? This claim is often repeated without evidence, as if 8 year olds routinely wake up in a mood to get surgery and are in recovery by dinner. Because doctors hand out surgery the way the guy at 7-11 hands out Doritos and a Big Gulp.

these dictionaries — once a place we collectively went for definitions and etymologies

You still can. Just bring your brain with you.

By the way, it might also help to understand how dictionaries develop their definitions. Definitions do not come from God or some other high authority, get printed in a dictionary, and then disseminate to a compliant populace. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Dictionaries don’t direct and control the language, they  reflect common usage. As common usage evolves and changes the meanings, spellings, or pronunciations of words, dictionary editors change their holy books in response.

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
6.1  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Tacos! @6    2 years ago

"Different Strokes for Different Folks" was, and, is a well-meaning song. It is similar to "Live and Let Die" which is, I am told by one of my hallucinations, a Republican MAGA phrase used to justify exclusivity.

 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
7  Jasper2529    2 years ago
Orwell

He and others warned readers about Marxism and Communism. We, in a still-free USA, are seeing many aspects of Marxism taking root in 2022 and should start paying attention.  This playbook was written long ago....

  1. Bezmenov, who warned us in 1984 that a free society collapses in four stages, and the first is  demoralization .
  2. What’s the second step?  Destabilization .
  3. The third stage is crisis, the catalyzing event that builds on the first two stages to bring on the change the revolutionaries are looking for.
  4. What’s the fourth stage? Normalization. As in, a “new normal.” 

I recommend that anyone who is interested read the article below, because it contains descriptions of the 4 stages of Marxism that are visible in today's USA.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
7.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Jasper2529 @7    2 years ago
We, in a still-free USA, are seeing many aspects of Marxism taking root in 2022

Marxism is not taking root at all. The US is so far from what Karl Marx envisioned that you really cannot even out the two in the same sentence and have it make sense.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Thrawn 31 @7.1    2 years ago

Just throwing shit at the wall, as usual

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Thrawn 31 @7.1    2 years ago

Especially in the USA, the terms socialism, communism, Marxism are so overloaded and screwed up that it is a litmus test for conspiracy theory / fear-mongering if anyone uses them.

How utterly ridiculous to think that the USA is in danger of a 'Marxist revolution'.   Marxist theory was based on 19th century European realities, not the complex, interrelated socio-economic/political system in place in the USA today.   Capitalism in the USA is not in danger of collapsing under its own weight (at least not in the foreseeable future) and the proletariat is not even close to class consciousness with no realistic method to organize workers to take over industry.   Not to mention, the idea of a revolution by the people would necessarily require overthrowing the US government.

People need to get a grip.   The realistic concern is our continued irresponsible spending and borrowing and the perpetual growth (and intrusion) of the government.   The problem is, in short, a continued growth in Big government and corruption of same.   

Marxism in the USA is only a problem for irrational conspiracy theorists and those who have no real clue what they are talking about.

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
7.1.3  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Thrawn 31 @7.1    2 years ago

Was the poster, perhaps, referring to the Right-Wing, Extremists MAGA, Jan.6th Insurrectionists?

We must never judge a book by its cover, or a post by its grammatical mistakes, or spelling errors.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
8  Right Down the Center    2 years ago

Round and round and round we go. And the majority of the world just looks upon the US and laughs at the country that doesn't know the difference between a man and a woman.

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
8.1  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Right Down the Center @8    2 years ago

Is that a good thing? Humor is appreciated in most democracies and is verboten in Communist countries.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
9  Buzz of the Orient    2 years ago

Having majored in English Literature in university, being Editor-in-Chief of my university newspaper, teaching English to Chinese students for 6 years at a private high school and teaching English privately thereafter until retiring when the covid pandemic happened, having read about those redefinitions, all I can say as I've said again and again: "Scotty, beam me back to the early 1950s", and if that doesn't work, "Stop the world, I want to get off."  If Shakespeare had seen that shit, never mind Shakespeare, if Hemingway had seen that shit, he'd laugh his ass off. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
9.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @9    2 years ago

Been thinking a bit about it.  Since they're unique, sort of like hybrids, maybe they should be called something different, like "transale" and "transman".

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
9.2  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @9    2 years ago

Heminway certainly, but Shakespeare I am not certain. He after all used men to play the part of women in his plays and had a number of words that are seldom, if not ever used.

Like everything else, it is a "fad," a short one, I, too, hope.

What then do we call Miss Lindseed? Mister, Miss, MF-ers, Southern Racists, or Trump's Dirty Diaper Wiper.

Nice to hear from you.

I, too, was an English & Theater major, who attended a predominately black university in Wilberforce, Ohio where Ebonics was spoken by many of the students, but only a few of the professors. 

I learned to speak a little of it.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
9.2.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Eat The Press Do Not Read It @9.2    2 years ago

Well, if not Shakespeare, how about Webster, who did a job shortening words to make them easier.

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
10  independent Liberal    2 years ago

Changing the definition of a woman to capitulate to the trans activists is one of the most oppressive actions we have seen in the last century. Most men that support this nonsense have a fetish where they are attracted to men with cocks who dress like women. They are actually bicurious or gay and there is science to support this. They call you a bigot to hide their secret, they are attracted to it. The consequence is that a century of women's rights is being eroded because they have a fetish. Once again their is scientific evidence they are obsessed with it. 80% of the supporters of this unscientific nonsense are men. Hopefully their poor wives know they are obsessed with men with breasts and cocks. Ladies if your husband is defending this, he's likely in your panty drawer and thinking about cock instead of you. He needs to admit he's gay, nothing wrong with that but you need to let him go so he can pursue his dreams.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
10.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  independent Liberal @10    2 years ago

Ummmm, sounds like you have a lot of issues to work out. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
11  Drinker of the Wry    2 years ago
Rachel Dolezal wishes folks were as understanding about racial self identification as gender self identification.
 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
12  Thrawn 31    2 years ago

Ahhh, I don’t know. I am pretty damn liberal on most issues, but this one is kinda pushing me. I guess my position is this, you can identify as whatever gender you want, but you cannot change your biological sex, and you also cannot expect everyone to just dump all long established social norms at the drop of a hat to accommodate you.

You really cannot expect us to change all of our established behaviors and even language all of a sudden. 

 
 
 
Eat The Press Do Not Read It
PhD Guide
12.1  Eat The Press Do Not Read It  replied to  Thrawn 31 @12    2 years ago

Try telling that to my 15-year-old granddaughter, who came out when she was 13 much to the charging of my wife. I accepted it, had an intuition prior to her breaking the news, and accepted it.

The SHE/HE, THEY, PANGENDER is a bit much for me to learn at me ripe old age of nearly 81. She does not want to be called by her legal name. I understand that, I stopped calling myself, "Johnnie" in the 8th grade and changed it to John. In college, I changed it again to John K. Roberts, out of respect for John F. Kennedy.

However, today, I write under the nom de plume of Jonathan Livingston Pigeon-Poo, "Doctored". It gives more credence to my newest podcast site,  "The Bird Droppings Institute - a Think Tank for Morons, No, Idiots, Please".

 
 

Who is online



27 visitors