Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
No bio...
User ID: 314
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
We should have both.
I'm sure the autistic geniuses can explain party-based specialization dynamics to the brass.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
I agree, but much red state legislation does not appear to agree.
If it's something like "you must out any minor suspicion", then yes, that is fucked up. The only bill I've read in detail was the Florida one, and that just prohibited deliberate deception, which is not obviously bad.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
One of his current ads sort of obliquely addresses the stroke by talking about how nice it is that he got to spend time recovering with his family and how everyone should have the same opportunity... so send me to Washington to leave my family and do high stress, literal fucking life-or-death negotiations for the next six years! This campaign is the most amazing dumpster fire that I can remember.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
I can cite this if need be.
Sure, if you don't mind. How is kicking your minor child out for any reason not an obvious, easy crime to prosecute?
This is the status quo for everything except physical or sexual abuse disclosed to them, as they're mandated reporters for that.
I was thinking more like suicidal ideation, or bad grades, where there would normally be an expectation that parents be informed either due to severity or routine.
All of the "gay" questions don't seem like something where it would be reasonable to go out of your way to tell parents, just as it would be for straight analogues. That probably wouldn't justify lying about it without a specific reason.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
I have made a couple of posts on the topic. Probably going to do another one discussing the messaging wars in their ad spending sometime this week.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
You'll reject any arguments I make to the contrary that Blue tribe is Out To Get You while ignoring or defending any Red tribe transgression.
I want to preface this by noting that I hit you with all these questions because I respect you, and I'm genuinely interested in your take.
Do you have any suggestions for comparable Red Tribe transgressions? From my perspective, Reds just look less invested in this part of the game, possibly from having a smaller "standing army", as it were, of professional partisans who spend all day thinking up culture war offensives to enact. But this could easily be a blind spot.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
render your child homeless
Isn't that obviously a point where the state has pre-existing authority to step in? Can teachers conceal anything from parents if they merely claim to be worried about the parent overreacting?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Yeah my point is that this is a point very much not in evidence.
It seems like it is. There are a decent few states with laws that encourage teachers to immediately affirm kids, and then actively conceal it from parents. Much of the shitstorm over the Florida law was about a provision that forbid concealing that stuff from parents, with an exception for situations where the teacher had a sincere concern that the kid would come to real harm, presumably at which point normal mandatory reporter / child protection stuff would kick in. What should I infer about that mild requirement sparking livid fury?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
This is fair. I was keying more off the word "anyone", which may have been changed in what looks like a mess of edits upthread. If I were to tie it more to the direct topic at hand, I would note that a sizeable portion of school librarians and elementary school teachers under 40 are "Tumblr-adjacent", and enough of them are quite happy to openly brag about how much they love normalizing kids consuming porn, or encouraging kids to be non-straight/cis to keep LibsofTikTok in business. Honestly, it's not like they have to do much; genderqueer/sexuality is essentially a conglomerate subculture these days and all of these kids have mostly unregulated internet access. Kids are finding this stuff well enough on their own, there's no real need except proselytizing self-aggrandizement to insist on having books in the middle-school library that can't be read aloud at a schoolboard meeting.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
That was how it worked for my adult friend. First time she saw any kind of medical personnel in years she got put on estrogen. Weeks later, she got her first round of bloodwork back showing serious endocrine issues, namely a critically low testosterone level, which apparently did nothing to give anyone any pause.
Now, this is an adult and not a child, but aren't there something like 1000 similar complaints being alleged at Tavistock?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
It seems very normalized in what we might call Tumblr-adjacent spaces. Come for the Harry Potter fanfiction! Stay for the Draco!mpreg BDSM scenes!
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Than what?
Than schools or professional organizations that aren't doing ideological queerness stuff. I mean, yes, nothing here is really going to stop kids from being abused by their families. But if a coach, a priest or a scout leader want to ensure kids have access to porn, and knows the adult is open to confidential conversations about sex and private parts and they promise to keep it secret from the parents - we would consider that extremely alarming!
And when the adult doings that is an art teacher or librarian with some inane academic word salad to justify it - still extremely concerning!
Making sure gay kids don't hate themselves is a fine goal, but I don’t see any reason we can't do that without dropping existing useful heuristics about protecting kids.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
More specifically, they're creating a cultural environment more conducive to pedophiles raping kids in general. We have decades of accumulated knowledge of youth protection best practices. They are an enormous, bureaucratic pain in the ass, and we follow them anyway because they reduce child rape. Trying to ignore these rules and best practices (for example, prohibitions on sexualizing conversations with kids, or showing kids porn) is insanely suspicious.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
I have to say if you're using that scenario to calibrate, we took a wrong turn somewhere.
It was what came to mind when I cast about for other examples of "person inspired to violence by overheated rhetoric." I stand by it being useful as a calibrating tool precisely because it allows us to compare and contrast, and see the reasons people might take differing conclusions. For example, you seem to be taking the fact that Jones was lying as a major aggravating factor; I think that it's helpful to pull that out and make it explicit.
If he had gone on unhinged rants that keyed off, say, Elizabeth Warren being a fake Indian, and viewers had harassed her over it, how much blame do you think Jones should get? If he calmly and reasonably laid out the game theory of dead SC justices during an [R] presidency, and a viewer made a (weak, failed) attempted assassination, how much blame should he get?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
As a calibrating scenario, remember that guy who tried to assassinate the conservative supreme court justices a few months back? That situation seems to have gone very quiet, but let's speculate that he was found to have been "inspired" by the rhetoric of a leftist group or media. Would it be reasonable to sue/prosecute Ruth Sent Us or MSNBC into oblivion?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Ward Churchill? Or is he too old to count?
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
They might be good, but they are not what I spent the last 16 or more hours looking forward to!
I feel this hard. Any sudden change to plans I've been dwelling on for hours fills me with a sudden, irrational rage. In the throes of adolescent emotional extremes, it would fuck me up for hours. As an adult, I've learned to just take 30 seconds to let my brain error and reboot.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Sending partisans in to loom over ballot boxes has to be one of the least trustworthy ways to actually secure elections.
We already do this, everywhere. Every time I have worked the polls, both parties had partisans on hand to observe everything, on top of the county election staff and the volunteer staff.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Having now looked up the formal definitions for both, yes.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Er, this is actually the level of incompetent hostility that right-wingers already expect from the ATF, and the response from the Democrats is less "this is good on a meta level" and more "this is good because fuck your ilk".
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Looking it up, I actually misunderstood the meaning of the word. I had the impression there was a strong subtext of homelessness + mobility, and thus would include people who were not in the municipality/county/state in which they were actually registered to vote.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
By Casual Voter Fraud I mean things like ineligible voting, impersonation at the polls, and mail-in or absentee ballot fraud; in other words, the kind of voter fraud a normal person could attempt without much difficulty.
That's not really what this is directed at, though. This is people voting in spite of not actually being allowed to. Felons, indigents, flavors of immigrants. Most of those categories seem likely to favor Democrats. It makes me think of the 2008 Minnesota Senate race, which ended up being decided by 225 votes. It was later determined that something like 1000 felons illegally voted in overwhelmingly Democrat counties. That result sent Al Franken to Washington, and gave Obama the 60th vote for the ACA.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Looking at the Mayo Clinic page,
Sex assigned at birth and gender identity are two separate things. Sex assigned at birth is typically made based on external genital anatomy. But gender identity is the internal sense of being male, female, or a gender along the spectrum between male and female. People communicate their gender to others through gender expression. This may be done through mannerisms, clothing and hairstyles.
Is this the answer to the "What is a woman?" problem that people have settled on? "A woman is someone who feels like a female." Merriam-Webster goes the same way. But what does it even mean to "feel like a female", if female is just the physical organs and woman is the gender identity? At first glance, this seems like an ugly desperate kludge; it pushed back the point where the incoherence can't be hidden, at the cost of essentially giving up on non-dysphoric trans.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2yr ago
Well, rampant NIMBYism results in enormous transfers of wealth based merely on who got into an area first (primarily a function of age)
That's not a transfer of wealth, that's just the existence of wealth. Your take here is just reversing causality; NIMBYs want the status quo, YIMBYs are the ones who want a transfer of wealth (to themselves).
massively infringes on private property rights, tremendously stifles any sort of economic development or indeed change of any kind,
Property rights are literally the basis of NIMBY arguments. And note how you acknowledge that point about the status quo versus change? You don't get to just assume that the change you want is a good thing, and you don't get to just handwave away the costs you dump onto others in the process. Maybe it is! Maybe the utilitarian calculation comes down on the YIMBY side! But don't act like this is altruism instead of competing interest groups fighting over their own benefits.
Have you heard of a thing called "property rights"? The NIMBYs are the second guy, they just already took the donkey and the YIMBYs would like it back.
Do you know what property rights are? NIMBYs are the guy who bought the donkey 30 years ago, YIMBYs are the guy who is pissy that he has to carry his own shit, waging a disingenuous rhetoric campaign to steal the donkey.
NIMBYs are already capturing massive positive externalities due to the increase in the value of their land because other people made their city desirable to live in.
See, this is the kind of absurd rhetoric that makes it clear you're not even trying to reason, just doing a tribalism. NIMBYs are the people who are already there, dude. They're the ones who made the area desirable and full of positive externalities. YIMBYs are the ones who want to eat that for their own benefit.
To then act like a victim because your house will be slightly shaded by a small apartment block
That is a cost. If I install a solar collector in geosynchronous orbit over your house, have I not done you a serious harm?
But since you're opposed to externalities, you must also be on board with efforts to ban cars from the city? After all, why should pedestrians and cyclists eat the cost of the noise, danger, and pollution caused entirely for the benefit of drivers?
No, I think the anti-car stuff is mostly the whining of idiot children. Cars are incredibly useful, and I've appreciated the hell out of them in every life phase that wasn't literally on a college campus. But if they bother you that much, feel free to go build your own car-free city. I'll swing by in 30 years to wage a dehumanization campaign against you and ruin the place for my own profit.
That seems like the sort of thing a parent might have a serious interest in being aware of. Especially if that involves being referred or funneled towards medical professionals.
More options
Context Copy link