And I'm making the point that maybe that's not a great definition. For example, someone with an extreme aversion to wearing clothes wouldn't be suffering in a nudist society. Does that mean they don't have a disorder?
New Call of Duty game let's players be Non-binary
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
We're not talking about "society generally is mean". We're talking about disownment, sustained physical and psychological abuse, discrimination, family estrangement, threats of violence. We're talking about prejudice that this particular community suffers on a rate far above average.
If you can see the link between being male and higher suicide rates, but not the link here, then I think that's just a difference in your personal perception. Most people in the Western world wouldn't say the existence of the draft presents a major source of anxiety or depression for them, because the likelihood of it actually being active is negligible.
As I mentioned earlier, I don't believe you're arguing in good faith, so I'm just not going to engage.
Last edited:
Those issues are less systemic and more interpersonal in nature, in the sense that there's no governmental body enforcing them, but people are themselves selecting for this behavior, the closest you could come to a systemic cause for these acts would be religion, because that correlates with a higher manifestation of such acts and worse ones, in non-western countries in particular. So a push against religious and other forms of prudishness and judgementalism is about the best way forward. But if we make it ok to judge people for having the opinions they do, they will feel entitled to judge you back, so a push against judgy tendencies has to come in the form of acceptance of disagreement, through tolerance.
And I guess it depends on which western country you are at because growing up every adult male I knew was drafted to the military, even the celebrities, and the only way to avoid it would be becoming a permanent resident of a foreign country with no draft and live there for like 10+ years. So it may be a personal perception but it's also real on top of that, you're just not all that knowledgable about what happens in parts of the western world and seem to think every country fares the same way England and the US and Canada do.
Well, the discrimination is in some cases systemic, but yes a lot of it's interpersonal. But at this moment we weren't discussing how best to rectify it (though of course that's an essential discussion to have separately).
No, I'm not knowledgeable about the status of the draft in very many countries, and can only speak from experience. And you're not knowledgeable about the threats & discrimination that trans people face. That was kind of my point: you can't conclude that there's a logical link for 1 but not for 2, because your experience and knowledge are limited.
I think you just can't answer the question, and you're accusing me of arguing in bad faith as an excuse to leave.
Oh, I'm not leaving, and happy to engage with others, regardless of what their questions are.
I don't think Houseman understands that he's excluding trans based on his preferences.
I don't think he could understand that treating people this way could lead to suicide and maybe that could be a contributing reason for increased suicides.
Okay. Hey, can someone else repeat the question to Silvanus, the question I posed here: #361?
Thanks in advance.
What do you mean "excluding trans based on his preferences"?
What way?
Why is communication with you so hard?
Because you refuse to listen or ignore the answers given. It's as simple as that. Don't play dumb or oblivious.
Okay, so then do you know what he's talking about? What does he mean by "my preferences"? Does he mean my sexual preferences? Please tell me what he means, if you do know, because until either Trunkage or someone else clears this up, I'm at a loss.
You can figure that out on your own. That includes a discussions with Silvanus too. The answers right in front of you, and like him, I'm not going to waste the post on something you should already know in or figurerd out. Quit trying to dissect every answer until the "right one" that lines up with your opinion. There is nothing left that needs to be said, you are on your own.
So you don't know either, just as I thought.
You gotta start coming prepared to these things instead of backing down the moment someone calls your bluff.
inb4NOU
There you have it; proof he's here to fight and not honest discussion, people. Straight from the House's mouth...
Thank you for proving my point. You have fun being miserable now. I'll be somewhere else not caring.
You have a race, 10 guys, 1 guy has a bicycle, and one guy gets shot in the leg. The 8 other guys who are neither shot nor on a bicycle are not privileged just because that guy got shot, because it is not the normal condition of people to be shot. The only person with privilege is the guy on the bike. But because the guy who got shot is way too slow to even see the guy on the bike any more after a while, he has to take his anger out on the guys running on foot that he can still see ahead of him, he doesn't even remember that there was a guy with a bike cause he's way ahead and out of sight, so he forgets it in his fatigue and dizziness caused by running while being shot on the leg, and soon enough he thinks the people running normally are his enemies, that they're privileged.
Nah dude, you just got fucked up luck, the other people are what you shoulda been too. They're not especially benefited, you're just especially unlucky.
Privilege is uncommon benefit not available to the common man, and the common man refers to the median member of the population of any society, not to the least common denominator of one.
Actor Elliot Page, formerly Ellen Page, announces he is transgender
The "Umbrella Academy" actor revealed his news in a Dec. 1 social media post.
This is a little off topic but I'm genuinely curious about this. Ellen (now Elliot) Page is Transgender now, or always, however they've decided this works. Good for him.
But in this article he still refers to himself as gay, even though he's married to a woman. So here is my confusion with how all these labels work. If Elliot remained a woman, then yeah he'd be gay for loving another woman. But since Elliot believes himself to be a man now, and is still married and presumably attracted to this woman, isn't he no longer gay? Right?
Because a man loving a woman is heterosexuality. And the whole claim with transgender people is that they are whatever gender they believe themselves to be, regardless of their biology. So if Elliot says he's a man, and has always felt like a man, then he is a man. Who loves a woman, so.....not gay then. Or still gay because this man still has a vagina and his lover has a vagina too?
Honestly I'm really interested in how this is supposed to be termed as it seems to be that people can pretty much label themselves whatever they want and you are just supposed to roll with it without question.
You missed some points. The guy who got shot was specifically shot because of the rules. It specifically stated that he needed, to be in that position. The guy who got shot is getting angry at the rules wondering why he was chosen to get shot instead of someone else. It's not luck at all. Maybe, why don't we get rid of the rules that cause them to get shot?
Now the guy on the bike got his advantage, right. It's not about taking that advantage away. It's about trying to give that advantage to everyone. For example, there are some idiots who say that reading to your kid before bed time gives them an unfair advantage academically and should be banned. That's stupid (and probably the people who you are talking about being angry). Instead why don't we encourage everyone to read to their children. Get them all to the advantaged 'bike riding' level. Then, think about the people who are shot in this case - those children who don't have parents who read to them. So why don't we have some remedial classes to help them read at school
No, because since it's part of the "secret history" genre, where the rules are it must not explicitly contradict established history, it makes the US government seem more progressive than it actually was, and is thus propaganda.