If DeSantis wins

[Phoenixmgs]

You're trying to be the sole arbiter not only of your own pronouns, but those of other people. Your position involves far more imposition than mine.



Riiiight.. except that the whole issue in that comic is that the stated name is really long and hard to get a handle on. Whereas "he" and "she" are the same complexity, and both extremely simple.

To be more accurate: person B tells person A their name is Pedro (just that), and person A insists on calling them Stephen because they think they look more like a Stephen.

I'm not, I'm telling how I and 90+% of the population do pronouns. You're trying to tell me that's objectively wrong when it's not. Like I said, I don't care what your position on pronouns are, but stop trying to tell me and others how they work. We've decided on how they work as a society and if you don't agree, you can do your own thing, and maybe one day enough people will do what you do and that will become the new norm, but that day is not today.

Yeah, the comic isn't perfect, found it here in reference to nicknames. My point was saying nicknames and pronouns are similar, it's a group decision and not one side having complete autonomy.

 

[tstorm823]

I am not suggesting anyone has 'control' over their own gender identity, in the sense that they can just switch it on a mere whim. What I'm doing is acknowledging that A) it can be fluid; and B) The best person to judge it is the individual person. That's not the same thing.

You're still treating identity as self-image, and it isn't the same thing. The individual person is the only person who can judge their own self-image, as they are the only one who knows what that is. BUT the individual is probably the absolute worst person to judge their own identity, because the way a person sees themselves is usually quite different than how society sees them.

Imagine asking someone who they think they are similar to and who they think they are different from. Then ask an outside observer to try to find people similar to or different from that same person. Who do you imagine gives a better answer to that question? You experience yourself in a different way than everyone else does. You see, hear, even smell yourself in a way that nobody else does, and in a way that you don't experience anyone else. But if you look at two people who aren't you, you can't know everything about them like you do yourself, but the comparisons you can make are dramatically more reliable, because you are seeing them both from the same perspective. I'm sure you've had the experience of hearing yourself recorded and thinking "is that what I really sound like?" Trying to judge who has a similar voice to you will not lead to finding good comparisons, because you just don't have the outside perspective from within yourself.

Identity being those ways which you are alike or different than others, you can't really judge your own identity that well because you can't see what you are like in the same way you see others. A lot of identities that people connect to have to do with their physical characteristics (size, race, hair, etc), and you don't even get to see those yourself. There are mirrors and cameras, but neither of those are perfect or consistent. You'll never see the you that other people see, and that makes it difficult to compare yourself to others.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You're still treating identity as self-image, and it isn't the same thing. The individual person is the only person who can judge their own self-image, as they are the only one who knows what that is. BUT the individual is probably the absolute worst person to judge their own identity, because the way a person sees themselves is usually quite different than how society sees them.

Imagine asking someone who they think they are similar to and who they think they are different from. Then ask an outside observer to try to find people similar to or different from that same person. Who do you imagine gives a better answer to that question? You experience yourself in a different way than everyone else does. You see, hear, even smell yourself in a way that nobody else does, and in a way that you don't experience anyone else. But if you look at two people who aren't you, you can't know everything about them like you do yourself, but the comparisons you can make are dramatically more reliable, because you are seeing them both from the same perspective. I'm sure you've had the experience of hearing yourself recorded and thinking "is that what I really sound like?" Trying to judge who has a similar voice to you will not lead to finding good comparisons, because you just don't have the outside perspective from within yourself.

Identity being those ways which you are alike or different than others, you can't really judge your own identity that well because you can't see what you are like in the same way you see others. A lot of identities that people connect to have to do with their physical characteristics (size, race, hair, etc), and you don't even get to see those yourself. There are mirrors and cameras, but neither of those are perfect or consistent. You'll never see the you that other people see, and that makes it difficult to compare yourself to others.

I have 2 friends that very much don't like each other (possibly even hate each other). Funny thing about it is that in certain ways, they are very similar people to each other. But if I were tell either of them that, they would most likely get pissed off at me (as they create delusions that they feel is reality and it's very hard to change someone's mind on that). One of them constantly says they hate drama yet they make the most dramatic Facebook posts constantly, and if you keep being involved in dramatic situations, it just might be you that is the cause of that, it stops being luck/coincidence at some point. But to point that out to them would be like dropping a nuke in the reality that they've created for themselves.

 

[Cheetodust]

You're trying to be the sole arbiter not only of your own pronouns, but those of other people. Your position involves far more imposition than mine.



Riiiight.. except that the whole issue in that comic is that the stated name is really long and hard to get a handle on. Whereas "he" and "she" are the same complexity, and both extremely simple.

To be more accurate: person B tells person A their name is Pedro (just that), and person A insists on calling them Stephen because they think they look more like a Stephen.

Also, as a person who comes from a country with "hard to pronounce names", just defaulting to the anglicised version of non-English names is actually a real dick move, especially if the person specifically does not like it. Hell even just using the shortened version of a person's name when they specifically request you don't is pretty disrespectful.

 

[Gergar12]

Trump Pulling Younger Voters Away From Biden, Poll Suggests

Other polls suggest young voters believe President Joe Biden, 80, may be too old to serve a second term. Better by far to go with the 77-year-old.

www.forbes.com

Fuck it I am not voting either, or I will be voting Trump. Given I live in a Trump-majority state I may as well vote defensively to avoid being put in a camp for Asian Americans, left-wingers or so fore. We are fucked as a country and as a planet.

Here's a more recent article.

Why Donald Trump is gaining ground with young voters

Joe Biden is struggling both on substance and on style

www.economist.com

 

[bluegate]

Trump Pulling Younger Voters Away From Biden, Poll Suggests

Other polls suggest young voters believe President Joe Biden, 80, may be too old to serve a second term. Better by far to go with the 77-year-old.

www.forbes.com

Fuck it I am not voting either, or I will be voting Trump. Given I live in a Trump-majority state I may as well vote defensively to avoid being put in a camp for Asian Americans, left-wingers or so fore. We are fucked as a country and as a planet.

Here's a more recent article.

Why Donald Trump is gaining ground with young voters

Joe Biden is struggling both on substance and on style

www.economist.com

If republicans were to start creating camps, you think they'd care about your voting history over you being a "minority" ( fuck I hate this word )?

Even if you'd escape the first culling, you'd just get blamed for something else later down the road. Thus is the way for fascist fucks.

 

[Thaluikhain]

If republicans were to start creating camps, you think they'd care about your voting history over you being a "minority" ( fuck I hate this word )?

Even if you'd escape the first culling, you'd just get blamed for something else later down the road. Thus is the way for fascist fucks.

And, secret ballots...how would they know who someone voted for?

 

[Silvanus]

I'm not, I'm telling how I and 90+% of the population do pronouns.

But you want to use your interpretation to ascribe them to other people. Who aren't you.

Also: your approach (basing it on appearance, regardless of sex or gender) is an exceptionally rare approach. How many people do you think would continue to use "he" if they knew the person they were speaking to was both biologically female, and identified as a female? It's not many. That's a weird fringe approach.

You're trying to tell me that's objectively wrong when it's not.

Nope, none of this is objective, we're talking about the human construct of language.

Yeah, the comic isn't perfect, found it here in reference to nicknames. My point was saying nicknames and pronouns are similar, it's a group decision and not one side having complete autonomy.

It's not even 'nicknames' though, is it? It's just names.

Someone else knows their own name better than you do. But you're trying to insist that if you think they 'look' like a Stephen, it doesn't matter if they say their name is Peter and Peter is the name they always had, they are a Stephen.

 

[Gergar12]

And, secret ballots...how would they know who someone voted for?

It’s funny you say that as my name when searched on the county website lists me as an independent.

 

[Avnger]

It’s funny you say that as my name when searched on the county website lists me as an independent.

That is due to party registration (or not, for independent). Party registration confers various benefits depending on the state (eg: ability to vote in closed primaries), but is not, in any way, tied to how your votes were cast in elections.

The majority of American voters are registered as independent. The majority of American voters also consistently cast their ballots for one party every election. These two facts are not contradictory at all.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

If republicans were to start creating camps, you think they'd care about your voting history over you being a "minority" ( fuck I hate this word )?

Even if you'd escape the first culling, you'd just get blamed for something else later down the road. Thus is the way for fascist fucks.

And when one side convinces you the other side are fascists, guess what side you'll always vote for no matter what?

But you want to use your interpretation to ascribe them to other people. Who aren't you.

Also: your approach (basing it on appearance, regardless of sex or gender) is an exceptionally rare approach. How many people do you think would continue to use "he" if they knew the person they were speaking to was both biologically female, and identified as a female? It's not many. That's a weird fringe approach.



Nope, none of this is objective, we're talking about the human construct of language.



It's not even 'nicknames' though, is it? It's just names.

Someone else knows their own name better than you do. But you're trying to insist that if you think they 'look' like a Stephen, it doesn't matter if they say their name is Peter and Peter is the name they always had, they are a Stephen.

When did I tell anyone how pronouns work? I only said this is how the majority of society uses pronouns. You guys are trying to tell me that a super innocuous everyday human interaction (that nobody actually thinks about as it's just automatic) is somehow rude or bigoted or obnoxious and trying to force some identity onto someone else. No, it's just fucking pronouns.

You do realize when people use pronouns, they don't ask for someone's birth certificate, pull down their pants, or do some kind of biological test, right? Guess how people are then determining sex? Appearance cues, whether related directly to biological sex or not. You're acting like you grew up in a culture/language where pronouns weren't a thing and trying to understand (based on like strict computer logic) how people use pronouns. The Muppets example is perfect and simple, that's what people do (albeit in an exaggerated sense).


So what Miss Piggy did in this clip when deciding to use "sister" or not (in less than a second of time, mind you and it was exaggerated) is more complicated than your method? And to quote you, yes "fucking bananas" is what this conversation is.

...which is arbitrary, and varies from culture to culture and time to time and individual to individual. So if we were to go by your approach, the same person's gender would be different if they (say) went to another country, even if they never changed how they thought of themselves.



Fucking LOL! You're preaching for a method that's far, far, far more complicated and arbitrary than mine.

Mine is very simple. Ask them, it depends on their sense of self.

Yours, on the other hand, necessitates the possibility of gender existing externally from the individual, depending on who is looking at them. Meaning it can change constantly or have multiple genders at once, even if the individual just identifies one simple way.

Think about it. Let's say there's a cis guy (biologically of the male sex, and identifies as a man) who wears his hair long and sometimes looks effeminate. Two people meet him in a day: one recognises him as a man, and the other mistakes him for a woman based on these stereotypically feminine traits.

I'd say: his gender is male.
Your approach, however, means the person has a male gender when meeting one person and a female gender when meeting the other. Since you ignore sense of self and only care about the 'eye of the beholder'.

Fucking bananas.

---

It’s funny you say that as my name when searched on the county website lists me as an independent.

Independent is the most dangerous though. They really don't care as long as you vote for either party.

 

[Gergar12]

That is due to party registration (or not, for independent). Party registration confers various benefits depending on the state (eg: ability to vote in closed primaries), but is not, in any way, tied to how your votes were cast in elections.

The majority of American voters are registered as independent. The majority of American voters also consistently cast their ballots for one party every election. These two facts are not contradictory at all.

But come on. When the militias are rounding people up, and they see you register as dem, why would they even need to ask you if you voted for Biden? They would either tell you to get in the bus, van, or whatever. Or just line you up a wall.

Atleast would I have a chance to call Joe Biden Brandon and say he's an idiot and maybe survive before moving to Australia, or Canada since I only speak English.

 

[Silvanus]

When did I tell anyone how pronouns work? I only said this is how the majority of society uses pronouns.

You've been insisting that your way is "the definition" for pages. That's effectively saying you're right and I'm wrong. But it's not "the definition".

You do realize when people use pronouns, they don't ask for someone's birth certificate, pull down their pants, or do some kind of biological test, right? Guess how people are then determining sex? Appearance cues, whether related directly to biological sex or not.

Obviously. I don't think you realise just how much this supports my argument, rather than yours.

Y'see, this shows how people use pronouns without knowing the sex. They make an assumption based on a few surface level cues that correlate with both sex and gender. Yet-- someone of the male sex can look feminine, and vice versa, which would mean the assumed pronouns would be at odds with their biological sex.

 

[Silvanus]

You're still treating identity as self-image, and it isn't the same thing. The individual person is the only person who can judge their own self-image, as they are the only one who knows what that is. BUT the individual is probably the absolute worst person to judge their own identity, because the way a person sees themselves is usually quite different than how society sees them.

No, I'm recognising identity is composed of various things-- a few of which are innate, and some of which are determined by the individual. You're treating identity as little more than external perception.

Imagine asking someone who they think they are similar to and who they think they are different from. Then ask an outside observer to try to find people similar to or different from that same person. Who do you imagine gives a better answer to that question? You experience yourself in a different way than everyone else does. You see, hear, even smell yourself in a way that nobody else does, and in a way that you don't experience anyone else. But if you look at two people who aren't you, you can't know everything about them like you do yourself, but the comparisons you can make are dramatically more reliable, because you are seeing them both from the same perspective. I'm sure you've had the experience of hearing yourself recorded and thinking "is that what I really sound like?" Trying to judge who has a similar voice to you will not lead to finding good comparisons, because you just don't have the outside perspective from within yourself.

This is a pretty well known phenomenon which has practically nothing to do with identity, and cannot just be transposed onto matters of identity.

Identity being those ways which you are alike or different than others, you can't really judge your own identity that well because you can't see what you are like in the same way you see others. A lot of identities that people connect to have to do with their physical characteristics (size, race, hair, etc), and you don't even get to see those yourself. There are mirrors and cameras, but neither of those are perfect or consistent. You'll never see the you that other people see, and that makes it difficult to compare yourself to others.

Yet, you seemingly want to trust the judgement of a passing stranger, whose judgement-- on appearance-- is likely to be even worse.

And of course, this all just applies to surface level characteristics, which aren't identity. I find it funny that in the past you've been quite insistent that men and women need not act or look according to the stereotypes of their sex; yet here you're effectively arguing that these surface-level stereotypes are so definitive of the sexes that they determine which one someone is.

 

[tstorm823]

You're treating identity as little more than external perception.

Yes.

And of course, this all just applies to surface level characteristics, which aren't identity.

I don't think you have even considered what identity is. I don't think you've given even a moment's thought to what the word indicates.

 

[Silvanus]

I don't think you have even considered what identity is. I don't think you've given even a moment's thought to what the word indicates.

What bollocks. If you think it's interchangeable with external perception and nothing more, your own grasp of it is pretty immature-- not to mention untenable, since it would mean someone's identity would shift and change whenever they met someone. If I met someone who assumed I was straight-- wow! As if by magic I'm straight now! Or if someone guessed my age was 5 years lower... kabam! I'm 5 years younger!

 

[tstorm823]

What bollocks. If you think it's interchangeable with external perception and nothing more, your own grasp of it is pretty immature-- not to mention untenable, since it would mean someone's identity would shift and change whenever they met someone. If I met someone who assumed I was straight-- wow! As if by magic I'm straight now! Or if someone guessed my age was 5 years lower... kabam! I'm 5 years younger!

I have no intention of being your strawman today.

 

[Silvanus]

I have no intention of being your strawman today.

You just said you consider external perception to be interchangeable with identity.

I gave examples of people making incorrect assumptions based on appearance-- external perception. And you're now implying that doesn't count; that those external perceptions wouldn't determine my identity.

Which is it?

 

[tstorm823]

You just said you consider external perception to be interchangeable with identity.

I gave examples of people making incorrect assumptions based on appearance-- external perception. And you're now implying that doesn't count; that those external perceptions wouldn't determine my identity.

Which is it?

I'm not implying anything, I'm ignoring your strawmen. Your examples are dumb and you know it.

Identity is the ways people distinguish you from others. If you are responding to any concept other than that, you are wasting your time.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You've been insisting that your way is "the definition" for pages. That's effectively saying you're right and I'm wrong. But it's not "the definition".



Obviously. I don't think you realise just how much this supports my argument, rather than yours.

Y'see, this shows how people use pronouns without knowing the sex. They make an assumption based on a few surface level cues that correlate with both sex and gender. Yet-- someone of the male sex can look feminine, and vice versa, which would mean the assumed pronouns would be at odds with their biological sex.

You guys don't seem to understand that not everyone finds your way the right way and you yell at people using pronouns any other way. Well, for those that use pronouns based on sex, we have the literal definitions as to the reason why we use pronouns the way we do.

As you said here:

I have no reason to believe the use of pronouns is or should be tied to biological sex rather than gender identity. Pronouns are used to refer to a person's identity, not their bodily functions.

Really? You have no reason (not a single one you could possibly think of) to believe the use of pronouns should be tied to sex? What about the definitions of pronouns that all directly relate to sex (not gender)?

It's more than a few surface level cues. Do you not realize how much your brain takes in and processes at any given time that you don't realize? It's not just because someone has a certain haircut or style of clothes. There's a such thing as micro-expressions we pick up on that you don't consciously realize. Same thing with a bunch of other things biologically related to sex like say skin and how men's and women's skin is different that you don't actually focus on ever, but you do notice subconsciously. Even a freshly shaven man's skin on the face is just going to come off different than a woman's for example. There's a ton of things that go into that you don't even know that you pay attention to. The fact people call tomboys "she/her" kinda proves my point that people don't care about surface-level stereotypes and go by sex.