If DeSantis wins

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,734
2,892
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
We're trying not to confuse Phoenix with large technical words, but it's true that Bill Gates is a Reaganesc Neo-Liberal
Yeah, I'm not going to call Gates liberal in this thread because far too many times liberal, even neo-liberal, is confused with left wing.

The US Liberals are not liberal at all. You COULD call Gates a centrist (I wouldn't, he's centre-right). This reinforces the point that the US Right has been jumping far right since the 70s. Anyone who is calling Gates Left-Wing is doing some massive leaps

But fair criticism Agema
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,383
8,889
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
The US Liberals are not liberal at all. You COULD call Gates a centrist (I wouldn't, he's centre-right). This reinforces the point that the US Right has been jumping far right since the 70s. Anyone who is calling Gates Left-Wing is doing some massive leaps
As I like to say: On the US political spectrum, anything left of Machiavelli is Marx.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,586
930
118
Country
USA
And here I was, assuming that if you're willing to make sweeping judgements about millions of people, you'd have done some research.
I did, and failed to find the information that you also failed to find. Your claim is there is a consensus among gay people that they did not choose that. You've provided sources (setting aside the highly biased nature of most of them) that make claims about minor but significant correlations between genes or hormones and sexuality, or polls of the general population showing far from a consensus on what people think of homosexuality, or a Scientific American article that for some reason tells long gripping tales of men choosing to change their sexual orientation only to turn 180 degrees and conclude that must only be possible for a few people.

But your claim is a consensus among gay people. I have not found any evidence of that. I've not seen the poll of specifically gay people agreeing to that premise, the polling you claimed exists and which I'm choosing to ignore, and which you didn't manage to provide across six sources (unless I'm missing something really deep into one of them). Why am I supposed to care about scientists trying to crack some genetic code, when even if they found a clear answer, you would never deny someone's self identification based on their dna? Why am I supposed to care if the general population half the time thinks it's not a choice? Why isn't there accessible polling data of gay people on the topic?
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,254
5,897
118
Country
United Kingdom
I did, and failed to find the information that you also failed to find. Your claim is there is a consensus among gay people that they did not choose that. You've provided sources (setting aside the highly biased nature of most of them) that make claims about minor but significant correlations between genes or hormones and sexuality, or polls of the general population showing far from a consensus on what people think of homosexuality, or a Scientific American article that for some reason tells long gripping tales of men choosing to change their sexual orientation only to turn 180 degrees and conclude that must only be possible for a few people.

But your claim is a consensus among gay people. I have not found any evidence of that. I've not seen the poll of specifically gay people agreeing to that premise, the polling you claimed exists and which I'm choosing to ignore, and which you didn't manage to provide across six sources (unless I'm missing something really deep into one of them). Why am I supposed to care about scientists trying to crack some genetic code, when even if they found a clear answer, you would never deny someone's self identification based on their dna? Why am I supposed to care if the general population half the time thinks it's not a choice? Why isn't there accessible polling data of gay people on the topic?
Ah, so we're in full fingers-in-the-ears, "can't hear you" mode (along with a dash of shoddy scientific understanding and the obligate insistence that you know better than the experts). As if you've provided anything at all more substantial than pure speculation.

Did you have a look at the demographic trends in the YouGov data, by any chance? Why d'you reckon that the "choice" respondents overwhelmingly come from demographics with much less likelihood to identify as LGBT, and vice versa?
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,586
930
118
Country
USA
Did you have a look at the demographic trends in the YouGov data, by any chance? Why d'you reckon that the "choice" respondents overwhelmingly come from demographics with much less likelihood to identify as LGBT, and vice versa?
Because for the last few decades, homosexuality was broadly treated as a lifestyle choice, while activists are trying to saying it's biologically determined and nobody makes that choice. But before that, for a long time, homosexuality was treated as a psychological condition, and the gay activists at that time were insistent that their sexuality was their preferred lifestyle, rather than pathological. And the switch in message happened after the movements to advance the rights of black people and women were dramatically more successful, movements that have a strong foundation in the argument that a person's rights should not be dependent on the circumstances of their birth.

When you say "demographics with less likelihood to identify as LGBT", it really means "old people", who may have lived in an era when that was what gay people were telling them.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,254
5,897
118
Country
United Kingdom
Because for the last few decades, homosexuality was broadly treated as a lifestyle choice
...by a population that identified much more as straight. So: as identification with being LGBT increased, so did the belief that its not a choice.

while activists* are trying to saying it's biologically determined and nobody makes that choice.
* scientists and gay people.

But before that, for a long time, homosexuality was treated as a psychological condition, and the gay activists at that time were insistent that their sexuality was their preferred lifestyle, rather than pathological. And the switch in message happened after the movements to advance the rights of black people and women were dramatically more successful, movements that have a strong foundation in the argument that a person's rights should not be dependent on the circumstances of their birth.
Ah, so what you're doing here is subtly conflating "not a disorder" with "not innate", to imply there's been some kind of U-turn.

No, objections to classification of homosexuality as a disorder is perfectly consistent with the belief that its not a choice.

When you say "demographics with less likelihood to identify as LGBT", it really means "old people", who may have lived in an era when that was what gay people were telling them.
Your continued speculation aside, the fact remains that the more people in a group identify as LGBT, the more that group will consider it to not be a choice. That's statistically true, and a strong trend.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,734
2,892
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
* scientists and gay people.
I thought I might add this here
BOTH sides could get some of there studies wrong. But HOW they can be wrong is incredibly important. One way to be wrong just means they need to redo and take their measurements again. Another way to be wrong complete nullifies the original hypothesis.

Pretending that both sides are wrong in the same way is some fucked up nonsense that lead institutions like Fox to be brought to court by Dominion. Giving equal weight to lies as inaccuracies is a tool to hurt minorities
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,106
801
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Now on that I disagree, because I think you are wildly underestimating how far some of the US right wing are in terms of authoritarianism, illiberalism and nationalism. I mean, people talk about communists, but there barely are any and they certainly aren't in positions of power. Meanwhile, the Republican party and other figures on the right openly heap praise on people like Viktor Orban.



I can't tell. Most conservatives and right wingers do actually believe in welfare, social programs, decent healthcare access etc. The difference between the right and left in this is not whether they exist or not, but the scale they should operate on.



On the contrary, CA is a great place to live: that's why it has cost of living issues. This is the same sort of reason it's more expensive to live in the USA than it is in Mexico.
Again, can we end with the dumbass extremism because we can go back and forth with this all day. The left IMO is currently more authoritarian than the right.
1683929213398.png

Wait, right-wingers believe in public healthcare? Since when? This extremism is ridiculous, Joe Rogan isn't right-wing. If both sides were for public healthcare, the US would have public healthcare.

The only thing that's nice about California is the physical characteristics of the state itself. When I mean it's the worst state to live in, it's because of the policies put in place. One of the reasons housing cost so much is because there's not enough houses and affordable housing always gets vetoed, it's not just because it's ocean-side property.

I mean, YOU have asked for people to be banned based on your own personal philosophy. Numerous times. On this forum. Sounds like an extreme way to deal with a situation to me.

So... what are we exactly doing to extremists?

In most countries, conservatives are FOR some sort of universal healthcare, welfare, work program and disability pensions. It's normal. Most conservatives are normal. The US is not normal. The Democrats would not be left-wing in most countries. They would be about what the Tories are in the UK. The Dems are conservatives.

Cry all you want about not putting expectations of other countries onto the US but...

See this. What actually happened was the reverse. Eg. Tranwomen have been allowed to play in women's sport since 1970s. By Supreme Court rulings. 50 YEARS. But somehow, NOW transwomen in sport is a problem. No, it hasn't. It hasn't been for at least 50 years.

Here, in Australia, we have had some spill over from this culture war drama. A principal at a private religious school tried to ban homosexuals and transgenders (you know, similar things to what you personally have proposed eg. banning transwomen from sports) from their school based on religious beliefs and was quickly fired by the parents. Because of course that is the proper course. Substitute any other identity in for transgender in that first sentence and see if it's acceptable. Our conservative Prime Minister at the time did try to make a bill that would allow such prejudices, but it never left the cabinet because MOST conservatives here in Australia are interested in banning people

Lefties did not jump way out to the Left. The Right went Right.... (or actually what happened is that they just moved their anger about Civil Rights elsewhere.) Because this is norm for the US

The above meme is a lie. You can tell if you just poke your head out of the collective fart that is US politics

That's... capitalism. Two-tier economy is capitalism. Bill Gates and all the other rich people in California are conservatives.

Are you going to pretend that Carnegie or Rockefeller were super progressive just because they funded social programs and made schools? That would be nonsense. Just because Gates et al hand out millions of dollars does not mean they are progressive. They're guilty of all the unethical things they have done to get their money
When have I asked for people to be banned? I don't even use the Report button. I may have said something like 'based on the forum rules, so-and-so should be banned' at one point or another (which I don't recall if I ever did), I thought most bannings (from the old site at least) were dumb because it was in essence a "3 strike" logic that is pretty nonsensical (I recall short posts could merely get you banned), but never because did I say to ban someone I merely disagreed with.

People aren't calling Rogan right-wing because in XYZ country that is considered right-wing. You have one talking point or guest on that says something in line with whatever republicans are saying and you're labeled as right-wing and basically a reason to be ignored vs heard out. You don't see how this is leading to extremism and tribalism?

The science says trans women is unfair. What's the big deal in competing in your sex?

You don't even live in the US. The far left has moved far more left coming up with asinine policy that sounds nice but is far worse than just the status quo. Hence California is all democrat policy but only causing greater class divide that they say they don't want. Or the claiming they want affordable housing but voting against it every single time. Or the left protesting speakers and literally silencing them from colleges.
 

Attachments

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,369
6,884
118
Country
United States
Wait, right-wingers believe in public healthcare? Since when? This extremism is ridiculous, Joe Rogan isn't right-wing. If both sides were for public healthcare, the US would have public healthcare.
Ever heard of Romneycare? The Right used to care nationalistically about the well being of its citizens. Or helping people due to it being the Christian thing to do. Or basic compassion. Or even just pragmatic realism. They're fully captured by the prosperity gospel freaks now though.
You don't even live in the US. The far left has moved far more left coming up with asinine policy that sounds nice but is far worse than just the status quo. Hence California is all democrat policy but only causing greater class divide that they say they don't want. Or the claiming they want affordable housing but voting against it every single time. Or the left protesting speakers and literally silencing them from colleges.
Lmao, of course you think the Democrats are "left" and not Reaganites in blue hats. California's run by venture capitalists and it's left-leaning ideas come solely from the electorate bucking their leadership.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,383
8,889
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅

So, now in Florida, it is perfectly legal to refuse medical services to someone who is LGBT+ based on moral and religious beliefs.
Well, when you have some good ol' boys beating "them queers" half to death, you shouldn't force doctors to undo all that hard work.
 

Absent

And twice is the only way to live.
Jan 25, 2023
1,594
1,552
118
Country
Switzerland
Gender
The boring one

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,369
6,884
118
Country
United States
I mean, that's clearly not a thing that's happening. I was repeatedly assured that this was a thing that wasn't going to happen, so it's clearly not happening
 
  • Like
Reactions: Absent