Might I suggest that when you say something and then provide evidence, check that the evidence doesnt contradict what you say
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
Please read more closely to what the links you're posting say.
Check the video
It's not news coming Via the Jewish Chronicle it was the smears and flasehoods they're claiming were spread by them.
I should have given added context. 72 Virgins is a comedy fictional novel by Boris Johnson about an inept MP who foils a terrorist plot by accident. So they evidence they're using against him is he once wrote it in a deliberately silly comedy novel and likely with a far different context surrounding it. Possibly in the novel literally being said by the terrorist mastermind or whatever.
The issue is they're seemingly writing her as a more complex character and not super awesome amazing and perfect with only being held back because the Patriarchy / White supremacy. That's the woke way to write characters really these days.
I can't believe I actually have to explain this
The Jewish Chronicle is NOT all jews.
Also, as far I can see in the Ipoc report, they weren't claiming any secret cabal stuff. Or any problem with Jewishness in general. Nor in the tweets. The Jewish Chronicle (which I thought was Conservatives) was backing a conservative because of their identity politics, irrelevant of BJs opinion of Jews. The tweet is pointing out that they think this is hypocritical
At most, it's a VERY open attack by a very overt newspaper that happens to be Jewish that ignored their picks opinions of them
No because the protagonist from Forspoken isn't a super amazing perfect character.
some evidence for you
they were asking for a non-sterotypical charater
This says that factions in UK labour used a smear campaign against Corbyn (note: I wouldn't say Stamer lead this so that's dishonest imo.)
Note how 1. There isn't talk of Jews, as a demographic, doing this
2. Unless we are pretending that that faction in UK Labour are all Jews. Which I don't think a large group in any side of politics has stated
3. No talk of (((them))) being in control of media
4. This is all public. Not secret
You might have disagreements about what happened... but it doesn't match your original post which claimed that
1. Someone woke pretending Jews are bad
2. Pretending they are controlling all the media
3. It's done in secret
This tweet is saying that supporting #Itwasascam is being antisemitic. Which has nothing to do with those 3 points. And, considering it Corbyn (and MP supporter), I'd doubt a 'woke' person is doing this
I explained why I would do it because how the fuck am I supposed to know her preferred pronoun when I don't even know her? It is all about intent, deontology is what I use for morals and ethics. Why would you get mad at someone for trying to be nice? It's like people that get mad at others wishing them a merry xmas because they aren't religious. I don't got time for that bullshit. The story is literally that, I have no reason to believe my friend would lie about it.
Moose isn't a pronoun. English has a bunch of dumb things in it, doesn't mean we should add more dumb things when not necessary. Lastly, pronouns are historically used to refer to sex and not gender anyway.
So it's dumb to continue using "they" as a singular person pronoun, which we've been doing since there was an English language? No dude, this is just you being difficult. Again.
Also, if you're going to make a historical argument, then historically black people were slaves. What's your fucking point? Things change.
I mean, there's that bit where you know they wanted to be called they because that's a distinct part of the story you related, then said you were going to be calling them she regardless.
Much like my story, just because you're trying to be nice doesn't mean you're actually being nice, especially when the person involved specifically requests otherwise.
I dont even understand how this is a problem. A real simple answer... you don't. That's why the expectation is that people tell you
Oh, you're just scared of a strawman. I get it.
You know, if transpeople actually had cancel squads on beck and call, they would be targeted so much
Edit: Well it turned my comment into someone else quote. replying to Phoenixmgs...
I dont even understand how this is a problem. A real simple answer... you don't. That's why the expectation is that people tell you
Oh, you're just scared of a strawman. I get it.
Edit: just realised that this is just making sure that people have an excuse to not listen when talking about genders. I guess you got what you wanted
You know, if transpeople actually had cancel squads on beck and call, they would be targeted so much
I dont even understand how this is a problem. A real simple answer... you don't. That's why the expectation is that people tell you
Oh, you're just scared of a strawman. I get it.
Edit: just realised that this is just making sure that people have an excuse to not listen when talking about genders. I guess you got what you wanted
You know, if transpeople actually had cancel squads on beck and call, they would be targeted so much
I included a pretty basic example of why using they as singular doesn't work all the time. The only time people use they as a singular when it's some person they don't know like "ask someone if they can help" as that person is obviously unknown, though if there's a guy down the aisle in Home Depot in Home Depot worker clothing, you'd say "ask him for help".
OMG, everything that's historical isn't bad. Might as well say why are we continually driving on the right side of the road? It must be bad because historically that's what we've done. What's so morally wrong about using pronouns for sex identifiers instead of gender?
BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HER. If I bumped into her in the real world, I wouldn't know. She's indeed a female thus I would refer to her as a female with pronouns. There's a difference between trying to be nice and actually being nice, if the person is actually being nice, then they are being nice. It's not like you in the story were "showing off" as nice but being passive aggressive about it (like some family member you don't like), you were just being normal nice to the person. It's like say your father using a phrase you don't like (for example, I hate the "I could care less" phrase) out of habit and getting mad at him for continuing to use it when there's no intent of trying to piss you off. Why is it all on the other person for changing and not on you for being able to brush such rather inconsequential stuff off? Maybe that lady should think about changing her own perception of what the word "ma'am" means to her because calling guys "sir" and gals "ma'am" is very very common and does not refer to age by the vast majority of society (at most they just mean you're of adult age). Having words that everyone agrees means the same thing is kinda the point of language.
What strawman? The lines of dialogue purposefully doesn't include what's actually being discussed. And what the joke actually is referring to has nothing to do with trans people. Why do you think it's about trans people? You do realize It's Always Sunny is a very popular show and that almost everyone will laugh at that scene. Your life can get turned upside down by cancel culture, just google Justine Sacco. Is there some high probability that it will happen? Nope, but that fact it's a possibility is pretty sad.
How is this not just you being difficult? Because make no mistake, that's what this is. You know when to use "they" as a singular person pronoun. The only reason not to and misgender someone is either because you're a bigot or you're just being difficult.
Also, I don't take the "history" argument seriously for 2 reasons. One, it sounds like an arbitrary thing that you just made up, and two things change. Get the fuck over it.
Again, I used a pretty normal example of how it can mess up the syntax. People are already bad with names, now you want people to have a mental database of pronouns attached to every person, is there going to be a 3rd or 4th thing we're going to have attach to every person? Just looking up a pronoun list now, there's stuff like "zie", what? And, I'm the one trying to make things more difficult? Only the people that are close friends and family are possibly going to refer someone by the preferred pronoun anyway and most people in the world are just going to refer to you with pronouns based on your sex anyway. Why can't we just use sex instead of gender for pronouns again? Wouldn't sex be, you know, less difficult? And I hope you don't speak Spanish because that's a whole clusterfuck.
I glossed over this before but: obviously not a woman who spent any significant time in the south, lol. That or she hated every minute of it. We kinda say that reflexively here. What did she want to substitute for ma'am anyway? Just drop it entirely?
Because dysphoria is a thing. To deliberately misgender a person is rude, disrespectful, antagonistic, and in general just plain assholish. It's not hard. Mistakes happen, sure, but mistakes are not a big deal. Disrespect and antagonization however, is. You want to be rude to a transperson? Then you're labeling yourself an asshole, and should be treated as such.
Seriously. Don't be a dick. Or an asshole.
Last edited:
Then construct the sentence better. Speak better English.
You're going to have a fucking stroke when you learn about nicknames. Why is this an imposition upon you? Be real.
No, you're being difficult. There's a difference. You're acting as if this is some, vast perplexing problem with no solution except to continue misgendering people for your own comfort.
Once again, spoken like a man who thinks the rest of the world secretly agrees with him. Your arrogance knows no bounds.
Because dysphoria is a thing. By going on about how confusing it is to you, you're admitting to being stupid, an asshole, or both. Which is it?
Linguists, intersectionalists, psychologists and other people far more intelligent and educated than you pretend to be are already having this debate.
The example is meaningless.
Imagine we had Sue and Jane who both idenfied as female. You can't use "she" in that situation because it unclear whether it means Sue or Jane. Are you then to argue "she" doesn't work as a third person singular pronoun?