ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
No bio...
User ID: 626
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3hr ago
It's trickier then you'd think, particularly if you're using Apple hardware.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3hr ago
He kinda did by quoting the parliamentarian in question. You think the rapist being invited to a TV show is so extraordinary and inflammatory? Or that some people might have the same opinions as an elected representative?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
17hr ago
should you follow them around with a sign that says 'you are wrong', and constantly wave it in front of them?
You mean like with the flags they're covering the entire cities with, the marketing materials and children's cartoons with mastectomy scars, and school curricula with gender ideology?
I do not condone these.
I appreciate the sentiment, but the argument was that contrary to your claim that trans people are the oppressed minority who are just trying to lay the controversy to rest, and are being fallowed around and harassed, they are actually the oppressor minority following people around and harassing them.
Some people identify very strongly with their biological sex, and in that hypothetical, would be very motivated to restore it; these people have a gender identity that aligns with their biological sex.
Like I said, given the lack of evidence, or even a coherent definition, I have no reason to believe that, any more than I do people who claim they engage in recreational Astral Travel.
Some of us don't consider Minority Report or Psycho Pass to be an aspirational ideal.
Being told to go to the other bathroom is hardly belongs to the same category as getting sent to mandatory therapy because your hue was a bit too cloudy today.
Offer accepted. Gender neutral WCs for everyone!
Well, then you'll have to reformulate all the arguments we've been through. Why are we even redefining "man" and "woman" to take "gender identity" into account now? It doesn't matter, there's no segregation.
I mean that it is not a single definition.
'Biologically female' can refer to
Right, so that's "the" vs. "a", the former implying there's a single definition, while the latter implies there are many. Also why are you bringing up "biologically female" here? We were talking about "woman". You said that for some purposes like sports, "woman" could be defined to not include trans women, and you said that it would be compromise. I said if something is a compromise, then it's not a definition. A definition is used to communicate concepts, so that you can later settle through discussion, on whatever set of social rules you deem reasonable. Using definitions to predetermine a conclusion doesn't strike me as a fair way of approaching a conversation.
WRT human beings, 'female' is the adjectival form of 'woman'; using it as a noun is rather impolite.
Now, hold on there. I was specifically told in many conversations with people who believe in "gender identity" that "man" / "woman" are the terms for gender, and "male" / "female" are the words for sex. This would be consistent with the usage of "male" / "female" for other life forms on this planet. Also, demanding that I accept your proposed changed to the definition of "woman" while preventing me from using "female" to refer to sex is a blatant double standard. If I can accept your definition of "woman", you can accept my definition of "female" is not impolite.
This is just starting to look like you're trying to prevent me from arguing for my ideas, rather than honestly trying to come to an understanding.
thus 'genetically female' excluding both trans-women and those with androgen insensitivity syndrome
That's just "female". There's no reason to specify "genetically", because it is understood it's our genes that determine our sex.
It should be enough to demonstrate that the proposed changes are an improvement over the status quo.
If you're already changing something, you might as well make sure you won't have to do it again soon, because it turned out that someone else's idea was even better.
But also: you haven't even cleared the "better than the status quo" standard.
If it has been working perfectly well, yes, but usually when people demand change, it's because the previous ways weren't working for them.
That's not necessarily true. It's been a common pattern in the Social Justice movement to demand change, not because the new way of doing things would work better for them, but because they wanted to take control of the thing. The people who made the all-female Ghostbusters didn't do so because the old ones weren't working for them, and judging by the new one's popularity, it didn't work for them either.
...which not everyone has
You said you don't know how to enforce bathroom segregation without resorting to genital checks, my explanation should be sufficient. Yes, it would require certain states to reform how they do their IDs, but it definitely is possible.
and doesn't expect to need a special document just to empty her bladder in a red state.
In most cases she wouldn't need that. Like I said, on first pass it would work on an honor system, the ID would only be used to resolve disputes.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
18hr ago
Recently-ish, a bunch of Elite Human Capitals started acting like he's Their Guy.
The amount of Singaporean life that is controlled by the state is much higher than the western right-wingers who stan the place for the strong law enforcement and lack of redistribution would accept.
Maybe it's some other right-wingers you're talking about, but it all looks alright to me, mate.
If anything it's the neoliberals who seem like LARPers to me. They're all like "look at all the meritocracy and race-mixing", but have no stomach for the death penalty and corporal punishment. Like please, the same people who pearl-clutch over Bukele want to play Lee Kuan Yew stans?
"Known to" does a lot of heavy lifting, because you can always deny the accusation, and hide behind "it's just an allegation", but sources for claim are not hard to find.
More options
Context Copy link