Iconochasm
All post-temple whore technology is gay.
No bio...
User ID: 314
I'm really enjoying the idea of a Special Forces operative whose main job is maximizing GDP because MOAR ECO means trivial investments in the future results in disproportionate Dakka Dividends.
I think we're just talking past each other right now. Let's try again after some of these laws generate some actual specific situations.
He is a very tall man who looks like a stereotypical Trump voter with very left-leaning politics and a Hispanic wife. People were thinking he was going to be a shoo-in presidential candidate in 6 or 10 years. Shame to throw that dream away just because of some crippling brain damage.
I think that if the parent's response is going to be "making the kid homeless", the kid has a serious interest in the parent not being made aware of it.
Even the infamous Florida bill had a waiver for situations where a teacher reasonably feared the kid would be harmed if their parents found out.
Is this child actually trans, or just exhibiting gender non-conforming behavior? Is it the role of teachers to report violations of traditional gender norms?
That's where it comes down to judgment, norms, and expected responses. Boys have been putting on eye-liner for half a century. Only recently has it been a behavior where an overly eager teacher might recommend a life-altering path of extreme body modification.
Boy named Jack wears makeup at school now, and asks you to call him "Jane".
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.
We should have both.
I'm sure the autistic geniuses can explain party-based specialization dynamics to the brass.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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?
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!
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.
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.
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?
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?
Ward Churchill? Or is he too old to count?
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.
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.
Having now looked up the formal definitions for both, yes.

I am very skeptical of this narrative. None of Fetterman's ads even hint at his left-wing politics, except when he has to try to defend past statements. His whole tone is built around heavily implying that he is a Trump/Carlson style right populist who wants to fight Washington, without ever mentioning any specific policies. Meanwhile, most of the attack ads against him are about how Fetterman is an extreme leftist.
More options
Context Copy link