He will.
BlitzoTheOisSilent
joined 1 year ago
Unless you're providing statistical evidence to back up your claims, I'm not interested in discussing further.
You can continue making whatever excuses you want to justify your mild transphobia, but I'm done debating with you, and haven't even read this response because it's nonsense.
Whatever excuse you need to justify how an individual's request for you to respect their pronouns, their identity as a human being, is up for debate because it somehow inconveniences you.
Except for the most extreme cases you can come up with, nothing is black and white, everything is grey, and your insistence that i must be a bad guy because i challenge anything makes you not terribly worth engaging.
I'm still waiting for evidence of all of these numerous cases of people using pronouns for attention, and all these people making up sexual assault claims. You got any?
Since I've clearly lost the argument entirely (sure, bud, sure), you clearly must have a plethora of evidence and examples that actually support your claim.
This entire comment is attacking me, and nothing that I actually said, while using generalizations to paint this picture that I don't understand unless I can use extremely specific examples.
What part of "This entire debate is a debate about respect" do you not understand, and what argument is there to be had about that? I'd love to hear it, I'd love for you to actually engage with anything I've said beyond "yOu HaVe To UnDeRsTaNd ThEiR pOiNt Of ViEw."
I already covered the grey areas, if you actually what I wrote, you're just being willfully ignorant about it. "No one should be yelled at for a genuine mistake, but eventually it's not a mistake and you need to grow." Wow, yeah, whole lot of grey area in that one too, PHEW, we're demanding the world.
but you are not a good champion of the cause of all you can come up with is mocking straw men arguments and feigning indignance.
I asked you for statistical evidence to back up your claims and you've provided none, so I've had to argue your own ridiculous arguments that fell apart under the most basic scrutiny. Sorry you have a terrible take on this? That's my fault too, that's me mocking straw men arguments (so you're admitting that your arguments are all bad faith, straw men arguments, glad to hear it) and feigning indignance?
I'm not feigning anything, once again, using preferred pronouns is basic respect to another human being, and while no one should be offended by genuine mistakes, your continued defense of not showing trans people respect if their pronouns aren't up to your standard, is transphobic.
So, I apologize if someone who refuses to provide any evidence to back up their claims that there are so very many instances of people making up pronouns, or any instance of how someone requesting certain pronouns creates such an undo burden on the rest of society, isn't worth me engaging with further.
Keep making excuses for why you have it so much worse than the marginalized group who's request for respect is apparently a fucking debate.
Absolute clown.
American's inability to responsibly inform and engage themselves in our political affairs.
I don't agree, I still put the majority of the blame at the feet of the DNC. They wouldn't run on progressive policies, but also refused to compromise with the electorate on anything.
Almost 66 million people voted for Hillary in 2016. Over 81 million voted for Biden in 2020, the campaign where Biden's team worked with Bernie's team to bring some progressive-policy to his platform. Yes, four years of Trump and the pandemic helped that voter turnout, but I'd argue it was more the progressive platform.
And in 2024, just under 75 million voted for Harris, who ran a centrist, status quo campaign, and thought "We're not Trump" was enough to engage voters. Bernie was right, Americans want change, and being promised nothing more than a continuation of the status quo, people stayed home.
And before anyone says "The voters knew the price and their hubris cost all of us, I hope they're happy!" Why couldn't the DNC compromise? Harris lost Michigan by less numbers than protest voted in the primaries, so why couldn't the DNC change course on Gaza? They were the ones telling us the threat that Trump is, they were the ones urging us to give them money to fight (and as soon as they lost, stopped fighting), they were the ones telling us they know best and that they're going to shift right when we were asking them to move left.
I get it, 77 million people voted for Trump, and that is a problem. But, roughly 90 million Americans didn't vote, so instead of pushing the party right and parading around with Cheney in an attempt to win over Republicans, then demanding our vote anyway (I voted Harris, fyi) because "Trump fascist, Harris not fascist", maybe they could try... Popular, progressive policies that will resonate with all Americans? Policies that may actually make those in the "both sides are the same" camp to say, "Y'know what, they're actually not the same!"
It's a crazy thought, but it could work.
It's the color of the gelatin... It almost looks like congealed fat...
This... This is an abomination... We have looked God in the eye and spit in his face, and this is the monument of our hubris...
Far worse than the video a friend showed me of the woman who seasons her hotdogs in Italian dressing before cooking them 🤢
You can't just follow someone every day until you find something to nail them on. That's not how the system is supposed to work.
This is how the system works though. Cops can follow you while driving and wait for you to make a mistake to pull you over. They can plant evidence to take you in, lie to you to get you to confess (despite your innocence), and then still put you away/worse despite evidence exonerating you, or you withdrawing your confession. And this is under a system that Biden spent his political career helping build.
Not saying that's how it should work, but that's definitely how it works for us little people. And if it's how it works for us, it's how it's supposed to work for everyone, not everyone except the family members of politicians.
Al Capone was taken down on tax evasion, not murder and booze/drug running. Hunter still broke the law, and precedent means nothing in today's America. This gives the "both sides" people another fact to throw out there (regardless of justification, Biden still pardoned his son) as justification for not voting since clearly the president's children are now above the law (since Trump and Biden have now done it).
Biden just told the country that he doesn't believe in the system he helped create to guard against abuse, so he's going to protect his son and wish the rest of us luck because, well...
I’ll feel as long as I gave it my all and I did the goodest job as I know I can do, that’s what this is about. (When asked how he would feel if he lost to Trump during an interview on July 5, 2024)
- President Joe Biden
Damn, you're right, I misremembered!
Welp, I still think it deserved one more, haha.
Galavant, it was a show that only lasted ~~a season,~~ two seasons, but was just kind of a medieval-era musical drama/comedy that didn't take itself too seriously.
The songs were catchy, the characters were a little corny but grew on you, and the actors could sing fairly well. But, ~~it only got one season and ended on a cliffhanger, so we'll never know what could have been~~ I think it deserved one more season to bring some closure to some things. :/
🎶Way back in days of old, there was a legend told, about a hero known as Galavant🎶
Edit: another user pointed out a few things I was wrong about, edited to correct.
Yes, it is not a huge burden to remember someone's pronoun,
Then stop arguing otherwise. Stop making excuses. We get it, no one is going to get it the first time, no one is going to remember everything.
By your logic, fascists deserve a seat at the table because otherwise we can't have a discussion about fascism. Racists deserve a seat at the table because otherwise we can't see their point of view. White supremacists need a seat at the table because otherwise we'd only hear from those they hate.
But those things come from a real place too, and trying to bully or shame people for it is the same thing you accuse others of.
So you're just, again, victim blaming and refusing to show any examples of this supposed attention seeking. You got anything beyond a handful of cases over the decades?
You're right, the amount of respect a person receives should be based on the gender pronouns they use and the overwhelming inconvenience they apparently place on the general population. Yep, respect for a human being should be a debate.
When are you going to blame trans people for Harris losing like the rest of the liberal base seems ready to? I mean, we have to engage with that point of you, right, we have to tolerate the intolerant, right?
Right.
Just a guess here, but are you that desperate to get offended at something that you have to double down on everything you find?
No, I'm more disappointed that those on Lemmy, a supposed left-leaning forum, are ok with trying to justify not using preferred pronouns.
And I'm offended because your entire comment reeked of "if you defend your gender pronouns, some hick who can't be bothered to read the name tag in front if them and gets so easily offended for being politely corrected a few times during a conversation, we deserve the right to discriminate against you." That's literally your last paragraph, so maybe go read what you actually wrote and are defending before getting upset about someone calling you out on it, whether or not you're ready to recognize it internally.
Where in my comment did you find an opening for someone politely correcting a preferred name, to turn it into a snarky taking over the person.
I've never once said people can't make mistakes, but this complete "well it's difficult and ignorance is always an excuse" that all of you seem to be conveying is ridiculous. And it's absolutely a taking over of a person: pronouns are part of how a person identifies, akin to their name. Your example used a convention full of people wearing name tags that had their names and their pronouns on them. So, you can't read? You can't listen and hope you hear someone use the pronoun in a sentence? You can't go, "Hm, lemme do a quick Google and see how people use zhe/zher in a sentence."
Again, that would be like saying, "I can't pronounce Rajesh, even though you've politely corrected me several times, but this time you got upset so now I'm either calling you Steve or potentially just never bringing you up again." That was your entire comment, "This is too difficult for some people, so they don't have to ever learn."
Nor have I ever said that trans folks are justified in overreactions to people making genuine mistakes, but the attitude in this thread seems to be "it's ok to not take them seriously or dismiss them," which isn't ok.
We can argue the minutiae of very specific situations where it is or isn't justified, but overall, I don't see a situation where there should be confusion around "they." If you're having a conversation with or about someone, you likely understand the context around the conversation and should, without much difficulty, be able to follow and understand who "they" is referring to in regards to being a singular or plural pronoun. Especially if you're at a convention, assuming business/professional since you mentioned name tags, you should be smart enough to figure it out quick enough.
If you're reading and can't understand "they," you've either missed context or the author has failed to adequately define who "they" is in that instance. In 2024, I imagine you can look it up for a book, or maybe ask the person in the conversation to clarify if you're not sure. It's not hard, it's laziness on the part of those who "just can't get with the times."
You may want to dismiss or ignore those that take advantage of the gender topic purely for the attention, or lie about sexual abuse for revenge or money, but that doesn't make it disappear.
Doesn't make what disappear? Can you show me actual, statistical evidence to back up how many people are lying and just seeking attention? This reeks of conservative victim blaming and dismissal of actual victims.
Does it happen? Sure, but I highly highly doubt it happens in any meaningful amount for your statement here to bear any wait beyond, again, victim blaming.
but you're using the vocal objections as false flags just as much as the media used the false arguments as reasons to minimize the groups themselves.
I have no idea what you're trying to convey here beyond something akin to "well, not all men." I'm not accusing every person of being transphobic that struggles to adapt to new pronouns, but they're also words, you can learn them quickly, especially in your native language. And being offended if someone continues to correct you is more of a reflection on you, the individual who can't or won't adapt, to understand that "this is too complicated" isn't a valid excuse after a certain point.
And my entire thing, this whole comment chain, has been about how using proper pronouns is showing respect for someone, and y'all are making any excuse you can possibly think of to try and find situations where disrespect is justified due to your own failings or inability to grow.
Trans people have enough to deal with, is asking other people to use breath expelled from their lungs to show them respect, even with grace periods for adapting, really asking for the fucking moon here? Like, seriously, all of the controversy around trans people, and pronouns is the hill y'all want to die on? Seriously?
And as I pointed out in my original comment, you're allowed to not use new pronouns or respect them or whatever, but you're not allowed to be upset when society treats you in kind.
To win an election, you have to convince the conservatives that it is in their best interest to vote for the progressive candidate.
I disagree with you, to win an election, you need to convince voters to vote for you. That's it. Democrats have tried to win over conservatives in at least 2024 and the start of the 2020 campaign (before Biden worked with Bernie's campaign to run on more progressive stuff).
And they keep losing. If what everyone on Lemmy keeps saying is true, roughly 1/3rd of the country voted Dem, 1/3rd voted Rep, and 1/3rd didn't vote. And if we're to believe people who say "both parties" genuinely feel that way, and those people are likely to belong to the 1/3rd who don't vote...
Why are Dems trying to win over the conservatives at all? Show the 1/3rd of the populace who doesn't vote that you're not both the same. No, you're never going to get 100% voter turnout, but if 77 million (Trump's popular vote count) is 1/3rd, that means there's roughly 77 million people that can be won over to vote.
So the Dems need to go after them, and they need to start running on actual progressive policy and positive change for the average American. They need to stop letting Republicans control the narrative for them on their ideas and policies. Obama won on the message of Hope, Biden won on the back of Bernie's progressive policies, and Trump has won twice now on change.
The common denominator is change, the current system isn't working for the average American, and people aren't going to support the status quo. We can sit here and insult Magas and conservatives and comment on how empty their brains are or how selfish they may be or ignorant or incestual or whatever. I get it, I've done it, but I bet you at their core, they want something in this country to change for the better.
So they gambled on Trump in 2016, and regardless of your opinion on it, Trump spent four years showing people that you can change things, you can get things done, you just have to break all the rules and norms to do it. Biden gave people hope in 2020 (plus the COVID handling by Trump) so they rebuked Trump.
After four years of the average American seeing no material improvement to their lives (that's all I'm arguing here, not whether or not Biden actually got anything done), and the Dem candidate running on "I'm going to maintain the course," people stayed home. They showed the Dems in 2020 that progressive policies win, and yet the Dems still tried to win over voters from the other side as opposed to winning over the roughly 77 million who stay home.
It almost feels like willful ignorance on the behalf of these so-called liberal elite. The simpler explanation, though, is probably money, and that's why people say "both sides are the same." It's because money: both sides of the aisle still insider trade despite it's unpopularity with Americans, both sides of the aisle still hold expensive campaign dinners with the wealthy elite, and both sides still accept billions of dollars in campaign funds from the oligarchs. My cousin supports Bernie with his heart of hearts, but will not vote because "both sides are the same, I want actual change."
Progressives need to take the helm from the liberals of the DNC and get PAC and oligarch money out of their organization (which will never happen). They need to show the American people that they not only believe in change, they will get it done, and it will benefit the people. They need to ditch this air of superiority and moral enlightenment and just get things done, stop condescending to your voting base, and make your constituency feel like you hear them.
Anecdotally, my dad and I were talking the other day about the election. He supported Trump in 2016 with some enthusiasm (just because Trump wasn't a politician and "I make more when Repubs are in office"). Him and I stopped talking for almost 2 years after the election. But the other day, he kinda surprised me by saying, "Y'know, I don't like Trump, I think he's an asshole, I didn't want to vote for him... But I just can't vote for those pompous Democrats."
I told him how disappointed I was in the DNC, and he said he liked Kamala, but didn't trust the Dems (I know, the irony is not lost on me). I asked him how he felt about Bernie, and surprisingly, he made a joke about how we'd all have to learn to talk with our hands if he won. But talking policy ideas, my dad supports all of Bernie's stuff, he just thinks the Dems are out of touch with blue collar folks like himself.
He doesn't care that you've written a letter condoning the breaking of precedent to the Parliamentarian, and through the process of Habeas Corpus and Secretariat, after 12 years maybe they'll acknowledge they did wrong. Doesn't make sense to you, right?
Well, that's because it's nonsense, which is basically what the average American hears whenever the Dems get on their pulpit and start finger pointing and blaming everyone but themselves about why they couldn't get things done. The average American living paycheck to paycheck, who doesn't have a college degree, and likely hasn't taken a civics class since high school, doesn't care about all of these little caveats and the intricacies of an arbitrary system of rules and norms that they created. They aren't going to sit down and research various political theories and then do a deep dive on the various roles and powers each different tiny figurehead amongst the federal government has and does not have, rounding out the night with a hefty portion of the history and precedent surrounding constitutional law.
They're just not, and we need to stop pretending they will, or that people will even do the bare minimum of understanding how a bill becomes a law. So run on things they understand, and then actually get them done.
But lying? Nah, look at the division Biden pardoning his son has caused on Lemmy, lying isn't the answer. They need to run on actual, positive change, and then work to actually make it happen, not these half-assed attempts we keep getting like the ACA.
This turned into a book, but I liked your write up.
Ok, so, we're on the same side, idk where you're coming from so hot and heavy.
I'm also not sure why you responded to my comment twice, but I'm not going to respond to them.
I feel like you're putting words in my mouth...
I never mentioned the IRS, I mentioned Al Capone and tax evasion, not as a "he could bribe his way out," but more as, "he broke tax evasion law, and that's what he was put away for. Just like how Hunter Biden broke the law, regardless of precedent, he should face the consequences."
That's it, that's the only reason I brought it up, I'm fully aware Trump and ilk are going to gut everything they can. I'm on VA disability, I'm fully aware I'm likely to lose half my income under his administration, and I fully understand what lays ahead of us for the next four years.
See, this is just condescending, and unwarranted. I engaged your ideas, I didn't condescend to you.
You don't, and you responded to this sentence twice across two comments, not sure why. I explained above.
The fuck are you talking about, who tf is Bob? If you told me "that's not okay with me," I'd tell you I agree. Why tf would I say "this is how the system works?"
If whoever killed Bob got off because he was pardoned by his father, the POTUS, yeah, I'd tell you sorry, that's how the system works. It's a different system for the rich: I want the system as it is applied to them, and then maybe they'll change it. I don't want them getting to walk away because the system is unfair, so they shouldn't have to face it while we still will. That's asinine.
I want Hunter to face the consequences of the system his father spent his entire political career building. Your examples are irrelevant, there are people suffering under the laws and system Biden built, idgaf that "the Republicans play dirty, wahhhh, we need to stoop to their level."
Yeah, we fucking do, no shit Sherlock, but that needs to be done through legislation and loopholes, not protecting your criminal son after fucking over your entire country with your hubris. And spending your lame duck session doing fuck all for anyone but your family makes you a piece of shit who doesn't deserve defense.
You act like you've come across this grand, "no one else can possibly understand my thought process, maaaaaaan" mountain man guru enlightenment. "I want the system to be more fair for all, and that system to be applied equally to all."
That's your argument, right? That you took multiple examples to try to illustrate? That's how I'm understanding it, I'm almost sure that's what the 12 examples you gave are saying.
Yeah, I agree, but that's not the current system. The current system is the one I described above, yeah, I agree, I wish it was better. Biden could have done something about that over the course of his 40+ year political career. And he did: he actively made it worse, and then gives the country the finger to pardon his criminal son.
Fuck him, and fuck his pardon, I legitimately hope Trump still makes their lives a living hell. Y'know why? Because that's what's in store for me the next four years, and millions of people both like and unlike me. And you're gonna say, "No no no no Blitzo" and write twelve more paragraphs with forty more examples you don't think I could possibly have considered before writing this, I couldn't possibly have comprehended this example, to illustrate that no, that's just "I get kicked in the balls so he should too."
No, it's not, because Biden built the house that we're all going to suffer in. His hubris and arrogance as "America's Savior" fucked us, he didn't pass any meaningful police reform like you keep screaming that we need, he didn't do shit to make the system better, and at the 11th hour he abuses his power to protect his family.
No, fuck him. If he was worried about how the judicial system in the current form he helped create, not some idyllic one you keep saying we need to apply to them, then maybe he should have considered his actions and how they might affect his loved ones.
Y'know, the same bullshit judges say to people when they're in court, after they've been entered into the system that, once again, Biden helped build. The system the rest of us suffer under because him and his party won't do shit about anything other than line their pockets.
You wanna talk about pushing boundaries of your privilege? I went from a cis white male Navy sailor to a trans woman veteran, I'm fully aware of what minorities do and do not have the luxury of.
You're acting like I think only Hunter should face the law, no, I think all of them should have: Trump, his kids, every insurrectionist, every fucking one of them. But guess what? Under the system Biden literally hand picked, he dragged his fucking feet and none of them will face consequences.
And not only will they not face consequences, they're coming back into power, with a plan, because of fucking Biden and the DNC. So yeah, the system is fucked, but they should have to live under it just like we do, regardless of party or affiliation or wealth. Biden had 4 years to do that to Trump, blew it, and then did nothing to help us with his Presidential immunity but made sure his son was taken care of.
Comparing him to Rosa Parks for that is fucking disgusting, and she definitely wouldn't want to be associated with open corruption like that.