This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - eggsalad
Pages: 1 ... 678 910 ... 84
211
« on: February 03, 2017, 02:18:58 PM »
Milo's shock comedy is the opposite of intellectual diversity. It adds nothing to the discussion but memey insults. Bullying specific people and accusing them of being degenerates trying to infiltrate women's spaces like rodents doesn't foster diversity. It gives people who are different reason to hide in shame.
I realize these types adore the idea of saying "the 'tolerant' left is intolerant of opposing views", but at some point you have to realize letting Germany run death-camps is not permissible if you want to live in a world of diversity.
"Engaging in debate" with these types isn't some sort of instant win. Milo hasn't become popular because he is a scholar. He's become popular because he's a comedian. People who like Milo won't suddenly dislike Milo if he just memes his way through a debate, because to them that's what winning is, being as offensive as possible without being constructive at all.
And no, it's not "just free speech" at the end of the day. Promotion of these mindsets has very real consequences on culture and how demographics bullied are perceived. Promotion of the idea that trans people are just trying to infiltrate bathrooms is precisely why various states are aiming to make bathroom use for trans people either illegal or an interaction with the police.
212
« on: February 02, 2017, 01:21:55 PM »
The protests are a victory or the alt-right, really wish people could protest without becoming violent. Gives the opposition power.
That said, I don't think Milo deserves any particular right to an audience. He's a comedian, an entertainer. His comedy schtick is calling trans people rodents and emulating r/asagayman.
213
« on: January 29, 2017, 07:10:19 PM »
Define "critical of Islam". I'd say I'm critical of Islam but most anti-Muslim dialogues seem to just be more about how much they hate Muslims rather than how they can work to mitigate the ideology.
"mitigate the ideology" lmao
You're asking extremely religious people to disobey "the word of god". These people are thoroughly brainwashed.
Don't tolerate mutilation, murder, and abuse and it'll deradicalize in a generation or two when they live around good ol titties and booze.
214
« on: January 29, 2017, 06:35:02 PM »
as a very socially liberal person i think it's absurd that it even has to be said that conservative islam should be criticized for the same things we criticize conservative christianity for
the point is that conservative islam is far, far worse than conservative christianity
like a good twenty times worse
Thing is for most westerners the effects of Islam isn't noticeable in their lives. The majority of experience they have with religious bigotry comes from Christians, because Christians have clout in Western countries, unlike Muslims. If there's some homophobic ruling in America it's going to be from Christians, not Muslims. It's pretty fucking obvious why a liberal in America is going to care more about Christian fundamentalists than Muslims.
215
« on: January 29, 2017, 06:32:14 PM »
Define "critical of Islam". I'd say I'm critical of Islam but most anti-Muslim dialogues seem to just be more about how much they hate Muslims rather than how they can work to mitigate the ideology.
216
« on: January 23, 2017, 01:06:34 PM »
That poor fucking kid. I can't imagine having the whole world seeing and judging you when you're only ten years old.
Idk if I was him I'd just donate some of my allowance to a charity and reddit would inevitably get the circlejerk ball rolling off that fact.
217
« on: January 20, 2017, 04:37:38 PM »
People with mood disorders can't join up so why should transgender people be allowed to when they have a mental disorder or illness as well? I know transgenders aren't bipolar but they still have a mental disorder.
Because it has no affect on the ability to function properly as a person.
It doesn't matter, it's still a mental illness which can cause problems as well. The military already has a high suicide rate for normal people. So combat or whatever driving somebody close to the edge would be even worse for someone who thinks they were born in the wrong body. I'm somewhat going to repeat myself, but transgenders have a high suicidal percentage, so combat is not going to help out their state of mind when they're being depressed about being born in the wrong body.
Trans people don't necessarily have to be in combat positions. Also let's take note that just because a demographic has increased rates of depression, does not mean that it stacks additively in combat. Gays have higher tendencies toward depression, that doesn't necessarily mean they are combat ineffective. I can solidly say I wouldn't be giving a rat's ass about dysphoria while people are shooting at me. If a candidate has a history of depression, go ahead and reject them. If they've been clean for a long time, you're jumping at statistics and not assessing a candidate's record.
218
« on: January 20, 2017, 04:31:05 PM »
It seems very bizarre for a FtM to be held to male fitness standards when they possess, ostensibly, no male traits
You realize transmen take testosterone correct?
Are they only trans if they're undergoing hormone therapy? The training seemed to imply treatment would vary and it isn't strictly necessary to take hormones or get surgery to change gender markers.
I guess that's a whole other can of worms. Most trans people get HRT, and most who don't do so because of inability. I personally think HRT should be required, but I guess there are some people who just naturally pass or are functionally close to the opposite sex, I suppose that's where intersexuality enters the conversation. It's almost impossible to accurately blanket this stuff, and there are so few cases it might just be better dealt with case-by-case with assessment of someone's capabilities.
219
« on: January 20, 2017, 04:13:02 PM »
^ off topic People with mood disorders can't join up so why should transgender people be allowed to when they have a mental disorder or illness as well? I know transgenders aren't bipolar but they still have a mental disorder.
Usually the manifested symptom of dysphoria is depression. You can boot them for depression. If they don't have depression there isn't really any disruption of their function.
220
« on: January 20, 2017, 04:09:23 PM »
MtF.
221
« on: January 20, 2017, 03:58:05 PM »
Not military but as a trans person everything seems perfectly fair. In the database of personnel files, there will be one sex identifier: "gender marker", rather than two (one for sex, one for gender). I assume medical records have an extra entry for biological sex. At first I didn't like the idea of removing the different identifications on paperwork, because generally I'm tired of paperwork that only asks for sex, but I think what that was intended to do was help reduce discrimination, or at least perceived discrimination when the identification markers can clearly identify someone as trans. Transgenderism is considered a medical condition/disorder, and is synonymous with gender dysphoria "Transgenderism" is kind of a shit term. There's no real consensus on what it precisely means. Maybe I've just heard too many retards try to imply there is a school of thought tied to the idea of believing people can be transgender, but honestly the word is like saying "gayism". I'm not sure what the definition entails, sometimes when you define something as a condition people use it as means to remove the patient's agency or credibility. Otherwise I suppose it's fine to consider being transgender a medical condition. It seems very bizarre for a FtM to be held to male fitness standards when they possess, ostensibly, no male traits You realize transmen take testosterone correct? I don't know the timeline, but probably a year after starting T, I'd imagine they'd at least be at the base line of males for a long of things. Kind of brings up why men and women have different standards to begin with, but that's a different subject. In order to be considered a different gender, and have one's gender marker changed, that person must be diagnosed with gender dysphoria by a DoD doctor This could be problematic. I haven't a clue about how physicians in the military operate but people can get stonewalled by physicians all the time for completely arbitrary reasons. I would hope these doctors can't arbitrarily decide to ignore recommendations from outside or past diagnoses.
222
« on: January 19, 2017, 07:15:57 PM »
Bungle has porn threads, simple as that.
223
« on: January 14, 2017, 11:04:16 AM »
I wouldn't think so. While I'm in full support of the LGBT community and their rights, I think it can be agreed that the existence of varying sexualties and gender identities is just sort of a problematic mess to begin with. It could probably be easily simplified if we just created a legally grey bin to put all non-binary identifications in. An "other" category doesn't seem that painful to deal with. Without taking this the wrong way, I think the world would be better off if gender dysphoria didn't exist, only because of the amount of suffering it causes. If it turns out this is detectable and treatable in the future at such an early stage, I think it'd be best to go through with the process.
Thing is if it can be detected early, it can be treated early by any method. A good amount of dysphoria in transitioned people stems from how late they started.
224
« on: January 14, 2017, 10:50:00 AM »
Why exactly do these papers still use the term transexual for people who haven't undergone SRS? It's just not an accurate description, I had to read further to realize they did indeed do research on subjects prior to HRT, because whether or not they've been on HRT for an amount of time would have large influence on how notable the data is. That's just me being a pedant though. as somebody who believes transgenderism to be entirely psychological and nothing neurological.
Do you think human brains exist in an ethereal realm?
225
« on: January 04, 2017, 10:35:24 AM »
He gets harder with co-op. You have to cheese him before he scales in and co-op health multipliers make that impossible.
226
« on: December 30, 2016, 07:32:44 PM »
rape them while they swim.
How else would you fuck an animal in water.
227
« on: June 29, 2016, 11:21:16 PM »
I'm in agreement.
I don't have much desire to see it taken into law, however, because the slope will keep sliding until we realize that our actual definition of "personhood" is either entirely arbitrary, or poorly distinguishable.
If being a person means some checklist of mental functions, then obviously some humans are inferior to some animals, and when a human becomes a person is uncertain. If being a person means being a human, then I think we are simply using the state of human society to justify the status quo.
Obviously considering crows to be persons and babies to be sub-human would cause a lot of problems for society. But all things considered, the things we value in humanity (intelligence, emotions, etc.) seem to lead us to those conclusions.
228
« on: June 19, 2016, 07:36:51 PM »
How demanding is Dark Souls III in comparison to II? I can run the latter at a constant 60fps on medium settings on my toaster, so...
I've ran DS3 more stably than DS2 but with a lot more heat.
229
« on: June 12, 2016, 01:52:38 PM »
Can we all agree that Mercy's ult is one of the best in the game if not the best
widow
230
« on: June 12, 2016, 04:09:18 AM »
231
« on: May 16, 2016, 03:27:42 PM »
The mother has a responsibility not to harm her unborn child, and abortions do not harm the unborn child. You disagree.
I don't even think people that defend abortion would argue that it doesn't harm the fetus. But I would say (and I think, agree) that this law is nothing more than a natural extension of the denial of human rights to a fetus; if a mother could get an unqualified abortion under the law, there's zero reason she shouldn't be able to drink, smoke, etc. in that same timeframe, anyway.
Poisoning a fetus will inevitably harm a valid person and deny them what should be their right to a normal and healthy life. Killing a fetus cannot deny a valid person their rights because they never become a valid person. Unless what you were saying is that a woman planning to have an abortion can drink and do whatever up until that point, which I guess I could agree with. She'd be held responsible if she decided not to after fucking the kid's life up.
232
« on: May 16, 2016, 01:52:48 PM »
The law doesn't even treat fetuses as part of a woman's body, though; that's why someone can be charged with two separate crimes for killing a pregnant woman, or can be charged for harming a fetus in general (see: Unborn Victims of Violence Act). The mother-fetus relationship is somewhere in the medical proxy ballpark, where the mother is charged with providing responsible care, but is paradoxically also allowed to end the life she's charged with protecting (within certain time limits) for no medically-sound reason.
Have you considered that maybe these discrepancies exist because there are discrepancies in the consequences to the actions?
233
« on: May 15, 2016, 08:58:28 PM »
hypothetically yes
good luck realizing it.
234
« on: May 15, 2016, 07:04:32 PM »
INFP nowadays.
used to be ISTJ consistently before fixing the whole depression thing
235
« on: May 15, 2016, 06:54:58 PM »
the real question is how long is a line til its tolerable
IMO its 1/3 width
236
« on: May 15, 2016, 06:33:37 PM »
No, because there are none. Murder is not inherently wrong.
Killing something that isn't human, but will become human, is not wrong.
In fact, you're doing it a favor.
The very fact that since humans were smart enough to think, they attempted to find ways to prolong their life, attempt to create elixirs for immortality, create religions with beliefs about an everlasting afterlife, use science and medicine to increase life's longevity says otherwise. Not everyone subscribes to not existing being preferable Verb, so most would say not existing is terrible. First of all, "who I ask" doesn't matter. It's fucking immoral.
And secondly, the difference here that, somehow, you're still failing to grasp, is that an aborted fetus will never be a human. It begins and ends as a woman's body part. A fetus victim of FAS will grow up into a person. And the deformities that the mother inflicted on it while it while it was a fetus will be inflicted on it while it's a child.
It's no different than destroying your liver with alcohol before you donate it to someone else. "But AT THE TIME, it was my liver." That doesn't matter, because you knew it wouldn't just be your liver for very long.
That person should have complete free rein to do that while it is his, so... But I digress, on this same note, would you be against a woman who has hereditary disorders from procreating as well? a sizeable amount of the populace equate it to murder. And they are ALL wrong.
le objective morality meme, well spooked.
>advocating moral relativism >not realizing that means we can just tell you to shut the fuck up and not give a shit about you or fundies' crying
237
« on: May 15, 2016, 11:09:51 AM »
My manager close-lined a robber once.
Mine threatened a customer with a knife once.
238
« on: May 15, 2016, 11:06:24 AM »
I can understand it from a purely legal standpoint. Drawing comparisons to the abortion argument, it's been deemed that the woman's bodily autonomy takes precedence to an unborn child. Drawing from that same comparison, why should the woman be denied ingesting substances that she wants to if her autonomy is more important than the child? I'm honestly not in support of NYC's law, but can see the autonomy argument being even more of a shitfest when you say "x is allowed but y isn't."
Well there is a very clear distinction between forcing a baby to go through their life with fetal alcohol syndrome and other developmental disorders and not forcing that baby to go through anything. Maybe this is a by-product of mainstream adherence to the notion that non-existence is worse than any living condition.
239
« on: May 14, 2016, 07:47:06 PM »
Well if you were educated, you would know that you need a doctor's approval to have it changed
Did you think you could go to the DMV and just have it changed or something?
So I've been reading up on this and it seems a lot of states do have pretty fair ways to which you get your DL (similar level IDs) changed. I'm thinking that might actually be a viable solution. There are a few problems though in how all of this bullshit being on state or local levels can lead to inconsistent results. Some legislation are defined as written on birth certificate, some state "as biologically defined", which means DL or similar aren't legally valid. But I guess I'm coming to the realization that a lot of the people on the other side of the issue don't necessarily agree with NC implementation or any current iterations, but rather disagree with specific policies like Target.
Exactly
I would be more inclined to agree with people if they didn't allow you to change your gender on your birth certificate but the fact that they do makes it a complete non issue
Or should be a non issue
Well at least in NC, getting your BC changed requires SRS. Because SRS is not something most trans people get (and many don't even want), it should not be the criteria. Professional diagnosis and recommendation should be the criteria.
I think the reasoning behind that is genitals
The body is still physically the same with HRT
Transmen gain a shit ton of muscle-mass, hair everywhere, lower voice, have genital growth, and their fat is redistributed. Transwomen lose a ton of muscle-mass, grow less hair, grow boobs, have genital shrinkage, and their fat is redistributed.  Genitals aren't very important. This criteria still easily sets apart trans people from rapists.
240
« on: May 14, 2016, 07:25:20 PM »
Well if you were educated, you would know that you need a doctor's approval to have it changed
Did you think you could go to the DMV and just have it changed or something?
So I've been reading up on this and it seems a lot of states do have pretty fair ways to which you get your DL (similar level IDs) changed. I'm thinking that might actually be a viable solution. There are a few problems though in how all of this bullshit being on state or local levels can lead to inconsistent results. Some legislation are defined as written on birth certificate, some state "as biologically defined", which means DL or similar aren't legally valid. But I guess I'm coming to the realization that a lot of the people on the other side of the issue don't necessarily agree with NC implementation or any current iterations, but rather disagree with specific policies like Target.
Exactly
I would be more inclined to agree with people if they didn't allow you to change your gender on your birth certificate but the fact that they do makes it a complete non issue
Or should be a non issue
Well at least in NC, getting your BC changed requires SRS. Because SRS is not something most trans people get (and many don't even want), it should not be the criteria. Professional diagnosis and recommendation should be the criteria.
Pages: 1 ... 678 910 ... 84
|
Show Posts
