You is all a bunch of poofs!

#361

How genes and evolution shape gender and transgender identity.

Cat, pigeons, etc.

#362

KiwiInOz wrote: ↑2

I'm thinking that some trad/con ideas need a resurgence.

#363

Steersman wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:11 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ I done bin :nin:
:-) It's happened often enough to me that I generally at least try to read or skim the current page and the previous one ... ;-)

Happened while I was tapping out my response on my tablet. My vow to not use my computer for non-work things done did me in, so to speak.

#364

Ape+lust wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:06 pm

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

The Romans had a less refined approach to decimation.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... CKqXqu9f_k
Add to Buzzfeed's layoff of 200+ and it's a pretty good week. It looks like they're reaching the limits of backers who aren't seeing much for their "woke" investments.

Hopefully that chick can continue excoriating a society that enables her to turn a "literal PhD in romantic comedies" into a gig that doesn't involve digging root vegetables.

There are some funny comments on this KiA thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction ... _is_being/

Literal.png: (260.15 KiB) Downloaded 310 times

And what does she mean by "literal" phd? As opposed to a metaphorical phd?

#365

Suet Cardigan wrote: ↑ snip

And what does she mean by "literal" phd? As opposed to a metaphorical phd?

I suspect that it means that it's not worth the paper it is written on.

#366

KiwiInOz wrote: ↑
Suet Cardigan wrote: ↑ snip

And what does she mean by "literal" phd? As opposed to a metaphorical phd?
I suspect that it means that it's not worth the paper it is written on.

She means her dissertation was on RomComs. Literally. RomComs. Thats. What. She. Wrote. About.

If you can't get the sentence structure of a tweet down to make sense, why the fuck should anyone hire you to write articles?

#367

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑
KiwiInOz wrote: ↑
Suet Cardigan wrote: ↑ snip

And what does she mean by "literal" phd? As opposed to a metaphorical phd?
I suspect that it means that it's not worth the paper it is written on.
She means her dissertation was on RomComs. Literally. RomComs. Thats. What. She. Wrote. About.

If you can't get the sentence structure of a tweet down to make sense, why the fuck should anyone hire you to write articles?

I’m sure romcoms are an indivisible part of male cultural hegemony.

I’ve been noticing a similar trend while doing a literature review on recent Gallipoli ‘scholarship’. Nobody writes about the boring military angle. Instead we have every intersection possible between the social feelz of the campaign and minorities.

Peripheral but connected was a journal article I came across today on female war correspondents covering the Boer War.

So much easier if this mob defaulted to their standard line:

#368

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑
KiwiInOz wrote: ↑
Suet Cardigan wrote: ↑ snip

And what does she mean by "literal" phd? As opposed to a metaphorical phd?
I suspect that it means that it's not worth the paper it is written on.
She means her dissertation was on RomComs. Literally. RomComs. Thats. What. She. Wrote. About.

If you can't get the sentence structure of a tweet down to make sense, why the fuck should anyone hire you to write articles?

That's all she wrote.

#369

I’ve been looking at SMLE IIIs recently - purely from a historical perspective of course.

In a perfect world I’d like a pre III* (ie straight III) Lithgow model with cutoff, volley sights and windage dial.
And for it to be in a serviceable state. That places it sub 1915.

If I’m dreaming, I’d complete with 17” quillion bayonet. ($$).

Pretty rare. A good quality III* is around $1700.

In NSW, to get a licence I’d have to

Join a gun club, remain a member and demonstrate at least 4 annual structured “shoots”.
Attend (and pass) a safe shooting course
Background checks
Install a gun safe
Submit to regular on premise police inspections of storage protocols
Complete a seperate application for each firearm ....

#370

KiwiInOz wrote: ↑ How genes and evolution shape gender and transgender identity.

Cat, pigeons, etc.

That broad does to genetics what Deepak Chopra does to Quantum Mechanics:

Sexual identity genes don’t have to be on sex chromosomes. So they will not necessarily be “in sync” with having a Y chromosome and an SRY gene.

I'm struggling to conceptualize sex genes not on the allosomes.

This is in line with observations that gender identity is separable from biological sex.

That's kinda how dysphoria work.

gay men have fewer children than average

Ya think?

This means that among both sexes we would expect a spread of more feminine and more masculine identity. That is to say, in the general population of males you would expect to see a range of identities from strongly masculine to more feminine. And among females in the population you would see a range from strongly feminine to more masculine identities. This would be expected to produce transwomen at one end of the distribution, and transmen at the other.

Except we don't. Not in people, certainly not in cats or pigeons. Every single male frog in my puddles is croaking his lungs out tonight. Full-on balls-to-the-wall masculine. Any shy, retiring frog will not mate and that shy, retiring gene will not be replicated.

As they move into adulthood, nearly half of these children (or even more when the studies are closely interrogated), continue to feel strongly that they were born in the wrong body.

LMAO. She links to an article by none other than James Cantor:

There are 12 such studies in all, and they all came to the very same conclusion: The majority of kids cease to feel transgender when they get older.

Despite coming from a variety of countries and from a variety of labs, using a variety of methods, all spanning four decades, every single study without exception has come to the identical conclusion. This is not a matter of scientists disagreeing with one another over relative strengths and weaknesses across a set of conflicting reports. The disagreement is not even some people advocating for one set of studies with other people advocating for different set of studies: Rather, activists are rejecting the unanimous conclusion of every single study ever conducted on the question in favour of a conclusion supported by not one.

FYI, the 'majority' in these studies range from 60-80%. Does 20-40% count as 'nearly half'?

https://www.psypost.org/2017/12/many-tr ... rans-50499

#371

Every single male frog in my puddles is croaking his lungs out tonight. Full-on balls-to-the-wall masculine. Any shy, retiring frog will not mate and that shy, retiring gene will not be replicated.

Unless they are sneaky fuckers.

#372

KiwiInOz wrote: ↑ How genes and evolution shape gender and transgender identity.

Cat, pigeons, etc.

:-)

But I thought it wasn't too unreasonable - wasn't insisting that sex was a social construct, and seemed to accept that sex & gender were more or less two separate categories. Though I see Matt gave a less cursory read and wasn't particularly impressed so guess I'll have to address that in a bit more detail ... ;-)

#373

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ <snip>

Peripheral but connected was a journal article I came across today on female war correspondents covering the Boer War.

So much easier if this mob defaulted to their standard line:

https://twitter.com/ritapanahi/status/1 ... 15200?s=21

Looks like the battle lines are being drawn, each side marshalling their forces ... Was this maybe a bit of guerrila warfare on your part before the formal declaration of war? ;-)

Though nary a MAGA hat to be seen ....

#374

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑
KiwiInOz wrote: ↑ How genes and evolution shape gender and transgender identity.

Cat, pigeons, etc.
That broad does to genetics what Deepak Chopra does to Quantum Mechanics:

Sexual identity genes don’t have to be on sex chromosomes. So they will not necessarily be “in sync” with having a Y chromosome and an SRY gene.
I'm struggling to conceptualize sex genes not on the allosomes.

Don't think she's saying that the genes that code for "sex" - whatever that encompasses - are not on the allosomes (learn a new word every day ...); just saying that those that code for "gender" - whatever that might encompass - aren't. Different kettles of fish that you seem to have some difficulty with largely due, I expect, to a reluctance to define those categories, or to even consider the more credible ones already on the books. To wit:

Oxford_Definitions_Sex.jpg: (47.71 KiB) Downloaded 258 times

Gametes_Sctn2C.jpg: (104.04 KiB) Downloaded 258 times

Definitions_Gender_MerriamWebster.jpg: (121.5 KiB) Downloaded 257 times

ALL those words denote is that "male" & "female" are - by definition - those who produce sperm and ova - and that is ALL that is required to be members of those classes, and that "gender" is the spectrum of sets of attributes - different people have different ones - that typically CORRELATE - or not - with those reproductive abilities, or its absence. You might take a close read of the Wikipedia article on gender; of note:

Gender is the range [spectrum] of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between, masculinity and femininity. Depending on the context, these characteristics may include biological sex (i.e., the state of being male, female, or an intersex variation), sex-based social structures (i.e., gender roles), or gender identity.

We HAVE to define our terms at the outset - like the axioms of a system of logic or geometry - or we're just going to be chasing our tails. And some sets of definitions hang together better than others.

In addition, you might take a gander at the article on eye colour - seems there are "as many as 15 genes [that] have been associated with eye color inheritance". So it seems not unreasonable to hypothesize that many of the "behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex" are equally dependent on a great many different genes, some of which are probably on the allosomes - those that code for the production of testosterone or estrogen, for examples - and many of which are on the autosomes. Probably a large reason why we're not all alike as peas in a pod.

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑
This is in line with observations that gender identity is separable from biological sex.
That's kinda how dysphoria work.

Don't think that's what she means. Seems she's saying that gender identity is a separate category from biological sex, each with quite specific and more or less easily quantified criteria for membership. Although I think she may be falling short in thinking that identity is all that is encompassed by "gender". But see the above definitions and the Wiki on gender.

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ <snip>

This means that among both sexes we would expect a spread of more feminine and more masculine identity. That is to say, in the general population of males you would expect to see a range of identities from strongly masculine to more feminine. And among females in the population you would see a range from strongly feminine to more masculine identities. This would be expected to produce transwomen at one end of the distribution, and transmen at the other.
Except we don't. Not in people, certainly not in cats or pigeons. Every single male frog in my puddles is croaking his lungs out tonight. Full-on balls-to-the-wall masculine. Any shy, retiring frog will not mate and that shy, retiring gene will not be replicated.

<snip>

Again, you seem fixated on particular definitions that look untenable and inconsistent, unable to see that, as per the Wiki on gender, "male" and "female" are the (binary) members of the category "sex" - defined ONLY by "produces gametes" - while "masculine" and "feminine" each encompass a virtual infinitude of different combinations - a spectrum - of "the behavioral, cultural, or psychological [and physiological] traits typically associated with one sex".

Although I'm not sure that her conclusion - transwomen at one end (nice to see the use of the compound word ...) and transmen at the other - is all that coherent or tenable.

#375

Someone here has created a monster... ;)

My MP3 archive is in a state of chaos...it's a good thing.

#376

RIP Ron Smith...for anyone that is keeping up with the sort of thing...

https://downthetubes.net/?p=103667

It means more to me that the activities of any 10 celebrities you could care to name...

#377

If a trans-black bluesman is acceptable, check out Doug MacLeod:

None of his albums are disappointing, but I'd recommend starting with 'A Little Sin'. A very friendly guy.

#378

EXCLUSIVE: 'It was NOT about race.' Black basketball player who was jeered by Covington Catholic students painted in blackface depicted in shocking photo believes they were just 'spirited' fans supporting their team

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/01/24 ... 795804.jpg

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... _share-top

I think it's pretty much a dead horse at this point... :dance:

#379

screwtape wrote: ↑If a trans-black bluesman is acceptable, check out Doug MacLeod:<snip>

Liked the first track, will add him to the growing list.

Cheers, big ears.

#380

I'm sure it was no Trub, Bug-a-lugs.

#381

MarcusAu wrote: ↑ I'm sure it was no Trub, Bug-a-lugs.

Dinnae haver pish, y'mealy-moothed Jessie!

#382

https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/up ... 164600.png
Genuine Social Justice WARRIOR

https://thefederalist.com/2019/01/24/co ... n-vietnam/

#383

Good to know I am a Rwanda vet. I mean I was serving while there were french troops there in the aftermath of the genocide. If I had stayed just a couple of weeks longer, I could have added Kosovo as well. Damn!

#384

“When we see our youth going the wrong way, we will go up and say, ‘You are doing the wrong thing there nephew, or grandson,'” Nathan Phillips told Rewire News on Sunday. “This is just the wrong way. I tell them, ‘This is the way you have to behave. This is wrong, this is right. You gotta do it a certain way. We have protocols.’”

==
"Born to an Omaha Nation family in Nebraska, Phillips was separated from his mother around age 5 and raised by a white family until he was 17, when he joined the Marines. He has held pipe ceremonies for fallen and missing soldiers in Arlington National Cemetery. In the past he has struggled with alcoholism, but last fall he celebrated 34 years of sobriety. " --Vogue.com

==

"The report said at age 19, Phillips was “charged with escaping from the Nebraska Penal Complex where he was confined May 3,” according to a May 9, 1974, article in the Lincoln Star. The court approved a bond of $500 and set a preliminary hearing for May 14, according to the article.

Phillips then pleaded guilty to assault on June 19, 1974, and was fined $200, according to the report. He was also charged with underage possession of alcohol in 1972, 1973, and 1975, as well as negligent driving, the report said.

A destruction of property charge against him was dropped in August 1973, but Phillips was sentenced to one year probation for a related charge of alcohol possession by a minor, it said. In December 1978, he was charged with driving without a license, it said."

==

“I’m a Vietnam vet. You know, I served in Marine Corps ’72 to ’76, you know. Uh, one of the — I got honorable discharge, and one of the boxes in there, it shows that it was peacetime or what my box says is that I was in theater. I don’t talk much about my Vietnam times,” he said on video."

==

Nathan Phillips — the 64-year-old Native American activist inaccurately touted as a Vietnam veteran amid his confrontation with high schoolers on the steps on the Lincoln Memorial last week — was listed as AWOL (absent without leave) three times in 1975 while on active duty as a Marine reservist, according to Freedom of Information documents obtained by TheBlaze.

The documents show the three AWOL/UA (unauthorized absence) entries in Phillips' record over an eight-month span in 1975 on May 19, Sept. 2, and Dec. 6. It isn't clear from the records how long the AWOLs lasted, but the following dates represent each entry that immediately follows the AWOL entries: May 21, Sept. 8, and Dec. 19.

"The FOIA documents also show Phillips was on active duty from Aug. 12, 1974, to May 5, 1976 — and with a "discharged" duty status, as opposed to the "honorable discharge" status he's claimed" --National Personnel Records Center

#385

#386

Good thing I never adopted a native American kid. With their genetic predisposition to alcohol addiction and my predisposition to heavy drinking the kid would have been in big trouble from the start. My Dutch and German heritage at least gives me some protection from the long term effects of drinking...but... I think it primes my desire to drink. But who knows.... maybe I am just weak in spirit.

Nathan Phillips was raised as a Native American till he was five and then raised by a white family. That says a lot I think. How does a rebellious teen go through the transition to adulthood when his parents are "whitemen"? Well... it is not likely to be pretty.

#387

"Mr. Phillips served in the Marine Corps in Vietnam from 1972-76." --Toledo Blade

(lol..."76")

==
"The Stolen Valor Act of 2013, makes it a crime, to make it a crime for a person to fraudulently claim service in the military with the intention to receive money, property, or other benefits."
....
"Nathan Phillips has a history of lying about his military service as over $6,000 was raised for a documentary about his life where he claimed to be the Vietnam veteran that he is not. Director Maria Stanisheva said the documentary was about Nathan Phillips’ belief that he could pray his wife’s cancer away and it also talked about his rough upbringing, and the fact after he allegedly served in Vietnam then he struggled heavily with alcoholism."
--conservativedailynews.com

==

http://www.animadocs.com/portfolios/bet ... h-and-sky/

==

clip of Nathan Phillips bickering with documentarian about crowdfunding...

#388

The Huffington Post is losing staff?

Great.

Blackburn in England is now 25% Muslim , up from virtually zero 40 years ago.

Huffington Post goes to Blackburn and says 'This local community has been severely impacted. They've closed a leisure centre, because of Tory cuts'.

Was that really the *biggest* change that has happened to the local Blackburn community?

#389

Sweden's new 'Culture Minister' is in danger of cultural appropriation. It also seems the they have learnt nothing from the previous few decades.

:lol:

#390

I have been noodling some ideas in my noggin about "the gender spectrum".

So.... when you look in the mirror what do you see? My daughter thinks you see "you". She thinks you are looking into yourself. But, I think this is not quite correct. What you see in the mirror is an image of how others see you. The act of looking in a mirror is purely an act of how you relate to others in the world. This is how you can see what others see you as. You can never really see yourself outside the context of your society and your view of society(friends, family, media, etc). Your reflection is really an image of how you would see yourself as a individual in your society. Maybe I am struggling to explain this correctly, but I am certain my notion is correct.

So.... when an individual wants to change their gender from the one that is biologically driven they are doing so not for themselves (as most of them claim). They are changing in order to have others view them as they wish to be viewed. They are not changing for themselves so much as they are changing for others..... in order to change how others view them.

You can run a little thought experiment with the notion of someone being raised by wolves. An individual raised by wolves would never think they needed to cut off their breasts or genitals (except for the exceptions of body disphoria). They would not know of other humans. Now.... they may want to change in order to affect how the wolves viewed them.... this is certainly possible. But the idea of gender would never cross their mind. So... gender is a concept that defines how an individual wishes to be viewed by others. This must be true.

So.... in this regard I have no fundamental issue with a trans person. They wish to be viewed by others as something different than their biological sex. This is up to them. I wouldn't necessarily recommend this since it can have health effects and damage your sexual function. It is a life changing project... but I can be sympathetic to it.

What bothers me is the idea that gender is a spectrum and that you can have no gender. I can understand a person who doesn't feel like a stereotypical woman or a stereotypical man. I can understand them feeling like they don't fit well in the typical expectations for one gender or the other. But.... modern contemporary life has opened up personal expression to the point where very few constraints are put on gender. If you want to be judged as non-typical this is easily done through simple clothing a hair style choices. Go for an androgynous look.... no problem. Go gender-bender... no problem.

But, I think it is a silly vanity project to think you can tell others to use non-gendered pronouns for you. This demand is not about how you are viewed by others. This demand is a way to trying to change others to meet your peculiar view of the world. Pronouns are a simple general way to identify others at a glance. If you have to tell others what your pronouns is... then it is not a pronoun... it is a noun, plain and simple.

The non-gendered people I know have presented as women. They are not even particularly androgynous. They have female hair cuts, use makeup etc. The thing is that they are not even trying to look androgynous. and... they demand that I use a non-gendered pronoun when talking to and about them... and... here is the really annoying part: If I get to know these individuals I will treat them as individuals. Once I get to know them I will know them as individuals and not by their general gender pronoun. Really, being with them becomes a drag. Everything ends up being about their peculiar view of how they think the world sees them. It is an obsession to them and it is a drag to be with them because all you do is think about saying the right thing.

and in the end.... the non-gendered folks are not trying to change in order for others to view them a certain way. They are not changing themselves at all. They aren't changing their clothes or appearance. What they are doing is declaring that their personal problems are caused by the foundational structure of society. They are claiming that, by accepting a general concept of two genders, that their lives are being destroyed. This is what creates the claim "If you don't accept me being non-gendered then you are denying my existence".

My daughter threatens our relationship by claiming I am not sympathetic and I am cruel. If I do not become more sympathetic then she will cut me out of her life. Am I cruel when I say that her friends claiming they are non-gendered is not good for them? Am I cruel when I point out that their odd non-gender vanity project is a waste of time and is destroying their relationships? Maybe it is cruel... even though it is true.

It is funny, but I can get along with all kinds of people. Some of my best friends are religious and we argue the point quite a bit. But... they never demand that I become religious. They simply believe I am wrong about this topic. We move on or... we can talk about it... they can tell me I am wrong and I can tell them they are wrong (and then we play music and get drunk). But... when someone demands that I change they way I use pronouns they are forcing me to comply to their personal world view. They stab at my sense of honesty. They do not allow me to be myself in a genuine way. I think this is why the pronoun thing matters. It actually makes me feel like I am being forced to be sucked into a certain world-view.... and I REALLY HATE THAT!

#391

Do any of us see ourselves as others see us?

And on that theme - it is Burn's Night (25th January) after all...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsC-Aumx4dk

nb This probably needs to be translated from Scot's English into English English.

#392

MarcusAu wrote: ↑ Do any of us see ourselves as others see us?

I think he question is: Do any of us ACCURATELY see ourselves as others see us? Of course we do not, but this does not affect my argument.

#393

Bhurzum wrote: ↑ Someone here has created a monster... ;)

My MP3 archive is in a state of chaos...it's a good thing.

Now compare that to Aerosmith's gritty cover.

Then get yourself some Blind Lemon Jefferson.

#394

John D wrote: ↑
MarcusAu wrote: ↑ Do any of us see ourselves as others see us?

I think he question is: Do any of us ACCURATELY see ourselves as others see us? Of course we do not, but this does not affect my argument.

Does anyone really know what time it is?

#395

John D wrote: ↑ I have been noodling some ideas in my noggin about "the gender spectrum".

So.... when you look in the mirror what do you see? My daughter thinks you see "you". She thinks you are looking into yourself. But, I think this is not quite correct. What you see in the mirror is an image of how others see you. The act of looking in a mirror is purely an act of how you relate to others in the world. This is how you can see what others see you as. You can never really see yourself outside the context of your society and your view of society(friends, family, media, etc). Your reflection is really an image of how you would see yourself as a individual in your society. Maybe I am struggling to explain this correctly, but I am certain my notion is correct.

So.... when an individual wants to change their gender from the one that is biologically driven they are doing so not for themselves (as most of them claim). They are changing in order to have others view them as they wish to be viewed. They are not changing for themselves so much as they are changing for others..... in order to change how others view them.

You can run a little thought experiment with the notion of someone being raised by wolves. An individual raised by wolves would never think they needed to cut off their breasts or genitals (except for the exceptions of body disphoria). They would not know of other humans. Now.... they may want to change in order to affect how the wolves viewed them.... this is certainly possible. But the idea of gender would never cross their mind. So... gender is a concept that defines how an individual wishes to be viewed by others. This must be true.

So.... in this regard I have no fundamental issue with a trans person. They wish to be viewed by others as something different than their biological sex. This is up to them. I wouldn't necessarily recommend this since it can have health effects and damage your sexual function. It is a life changing project... but I can be sympathetic to it.

What bothers me is the idea that gender is a spectrum and that you can have no gender. I can understand a person who doesn't feel like a stereotypical woman or a stereotypical man. I can understand them feeling like they don't fit well in the typical expectations for one gender or the other. But.... modern contemporary life has opened up personal expression to the point where very few constraints are put on gender. If you want to be judged as non-typical this is easily done through simple clothing a hair style choices. Go for an androgynous look.... no problem. Go gender-bender... no problem.

But, I think it is a silly vanity project to think you can tell others to use non-gendered pronouns for you. This demand is not about how you are viewed by others. This demand is a way to trying to change others to meet your peculiar view of the world. Pronouns are a simple general way to identify others at a glance. If you have to tell others what your pronouns is... then it is not a pronoun... it is a noun, plain and simple.

The non-gendered people I know have presented as women. They are not even particularly androgynous. They have female hair cuts, use makeup etc. The thing is that they are not even trying to look androgynous. and... they demand that I use a non-gendered pronoun when talking to and about them... and... here is the really annoying part: If I get to know these individuals I will treat them as individuals. Once I get to know them I will know them as individuals and not by their general gender pronoun. Really, being with them becomes a drag. Everything ends up being about their peculiar view of how they think the world sees them. It is an obsession to them and it is a drag to be with them because all you do is think about saying the right thing.

and in the end.... the non-gendered folks are not trying to change in order for others to view them a certain way. They are not changing themselves at all. They aren't changing their clothes or appearance. What they are doing is declaring that their personal problems are caused by the foundational structure of society. They are claiming that, by accepting a general concept of two genders, that their lives are being destroyed. This is what creates the claim "If you don't accept me being non-gendered then you are denying my existence".

My daughter threatens our relationship by claiming I am not sympathetic and I am cruel. If I do not become more sympathetic then she will cut me out of her life. Am I cruel when I say that her friends claiming they are non-gendered is not good for them? Am I cruel when I point out that their odd non-gender vanity project is a waste of time and is destroying their relationships? Maybe it is cruel... even though it is true.

It is funny, but I can get along with all kinds of people. Some of my best friends are religious and we argue the point quite a bit. But... they never demand that I become religious. They simply believe I am wrong about this topic. We move on or... we can talk about it... they can tell me I am wrong and I can tell them they are wrong (and then we play music and get drunk). But... when someone demands that I change they way I use pronouns they are forcing me to comply to their personal world view. They stab at my sense of honesty. They do not allow me to be myself in a genuine way. I think this is why the pronoun thing matters. It actually makes me feel like I am being forced to be sucked into a certain world-view.... and I REALLY HATE THAT!

You're way overthinking this, buddy.

#396

The non-gendered people I know have presented as women. They are not even particularly androgynous. They have female hair cuts, use makeup etc. The thing is that they are not even trying to look androgynous. and... they demand that I use a non-gendered pronoun when talking to and about them... and... here is the really annoying part: If I get to know these individuals I will treat them as individuals. Once I get to know them I will know them as individuals and not by their general gender pronoun. Really, being with them becomes a drag. Everything ends up being about their peculiar view of how they think the world sees them. It is an obsession to them and it is a drag to be with them because all you do is think about saying the right thing.

Okay, now you're on to something.

#397

shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ Sweden's new 'Culture Minister' is in danger of cultural appropriation. It also seems the they have learnt nothing from the previous few decades.

:lol:

It's not cultural appropriation if your hair got that way from never washing.

#398

Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑
KiwiInOz wrote: ↑
Suet Cardigan wrote: ↑ snip

And what does she mean by "literal" phd? As opposed to a metaphorical phd?
I suspect that it means that it's not worth the paper it is written on.
She means her dissertation was on RomComs. Literally. RomComs. Thats. What. She. Wrote. About.

If you can't get the sentence structure of a tweet down to make sense, why the fuck should anyone hire you to write articles?
I’m sure romcoms are an indivisible part of male cultural hegemony.

I’ve been noticing a similar trend while doing a literature review on recent Gallipoli ‘scholarship’. Nobody writes about the boring military angle. Instead we have every intersection possible between the social feelz of the campaign and minorities.

Peripheral but connected was a journal article I came across today on female war correspondents covering the Boer War.

So much easier if this mob defaulted to their standard line:

Is this from the same rally? Trumptards owning the Libtard, the video that Timcast and Sargon of Applebees will not show you.

#399

Also 2 Syrian refugees arrested, one of them charged in connection with terrorism.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/2-arrests ... -1.4268282
In b4 Faith Goldy.

#400

If you're after one of the most influential bluesmen ever, check out Ruttlin' Orange Peel:

(father of John, grandfather of Emma).

#401

shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ Sweden's new 'Culture Minister' is in danger of cultural appropriation. It also seems the they have learnt nothing from the previous few decades.

:lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0OGTI8lZpo

Their Education Minister has no degree! :lol:

Have you seen the Belgian Minister of Health, Maggie de Block?

HAES all the way, baby. Just keep saying YES to fried potatoes until you radiate good health.

https://i.imgur.com/pu5shPW.jpg

#402

Fries with mayo is the Belgian national dish.

#403

#404

Lsuoma wrote: ↑ Fries with mayo is the Belgian national dish.

Haha, I'd forgotten that. Don't they have national chains that sell ~~french~~ belgian fries as the featured dish?

#405

Holy Shit. This guy was my daughter's vocal coach for two years. He was a very effective teacher helping her win one of her Broadway singing competitions. My daughter was a student in about 2009 and 2010 years before the charges. She was only in his home practice studio about an hour a week and his wife was always there when I dropped her off. Still... yikes... this is close to home.

Clawson performing arts studio owner charged with sexually assaulting teen

https://www.dailytribune.com/news/local ... b427f.html

#406

Ape+lust wrote: ↑
shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ Sweden's new 'Culture Minister' is in danger of cultural appropriation. It also seems the they have learnt nothing from the previous few decades.

:lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0OGTI8lZpo
Their Education Minister has no degree! :lol:

Have you seen the Belgian Minister of Health, Maggie de Block?

HAES all the way, baby. Just keep saying YES to fried potatoes until you radiate good health.

https://i.imgur.com/pu5shPW.jpg

I though that was Su-Bo. Looks like a condition, to be fair.

#407

John D wrote: ↑ [#1] What they are doing is declaring that their personal problems are caused by the foundational structure of society. [#2] They are claiming that, by accepting a general concept of two genders, that their lives are being destroyed.

What if we grant them both of those points?

Regarding #1: If I declare myself King of Manhattan-- then my personal problems (overdue rent, trouble getting laid, no health insurance) are indeed caused by the foundational structure of society denying me access to a kingly lifestyle/ my king-life is destroyed/ my very existence is threatened. I'm forced into an inferior role.

There's even a similarity in the pronoun department-- don't kings & queens get Their Royal Pronouns capitalized or pluralized or such?

And, #2: I can accept that the general concept of 2 genders is a form of Identity Politics collectivization... forcing everyone into collectives of All the "Hims" and "All the Hers"... or one big collective of Gendered Hims And Hers. And, just like (for example) 'being Black' can be an e-z substitute for the hard work of being an individual... just wear Black People clothes, listen to Black People music, parrot Black People opinions... and avoid anything "White"... joining the "he" or "she" Borg... can also be a self-limiting failure to develop individuality individuality. For some, the tradeoff of losing-individuality in exchange for easy answers is appealing... for others, it's suffocating.

==
Both of the caveats I've proposed... fail to end the philosophical dispute. Because #1 begs the question... of whether anyone Owes anyone-else special treatment, beyond the norm... whether King or Xir. And #2 begs the question... How can the same people-- who oppose the mandatory Identity Politics labels of male & female-- also endorse the Mandatory Identity Politics of Intersectional Social Justice Collectivism? If "he" & "she" are a bad binary... then "white" & "POC" are p-p-p-problemmmmmaaaatic in the same-way.

Is there any chance you can frame your difference of opinion as you-being unable, in good conscience, to play-along with an 'solution' that seems internally-inconsistent?
Like being asked to blindly agree-to 2+2=5. You can agree that that the dominant 2-genders viewpoint is imperfect/ but that the proposed SJW solution is even-more-broken.

==

I'm facing similar issues with my friend Fang. When I first wrote about Fang here-- it was easy to portray him as 'one of the good ones'... a person with gender-issues that make "he" and "she" an ill-fit/ who wasn't parroting SJW gender-ideology. (He prefers to dress as a women when fucking & fuck other dudes dressed as women, but he didn't demand being called 'she' outside the bedroom/ or, at-least, when he's not in super-obvious downright-clownlike drag.)

It's more true than ever-- that he doesn't feel like he fits in with SJWs... he tried joining a Gender Nonconforming group-therapy meeting... and was repulsed by their whining about perceived victimhood & their poorly-socialized 'acting like weirdos'.

But... Fang is going thru a hard time. He tends to pick some distant thing to fixate all his hope on... for a while it was "Moving To Louisville Kentucky" (an imagined promised land of low rent & 'normal' people)... after 1-week visit/ his endless talk about Louisville went silent/ like it never had happened. He also apprenticed as a cobbler... with dreams of switching careers... until it was time to actually switch careers. Same with taking a home-health-aide nursing course... but skipping the final exam.

So... right now... he's investing all his hopes in Facial Feminization plastic surgery. He's over 40 & looks like Bob Hoskins as a hairless Cenobite... surgery won't make him a pretty girl. Even if it did... he'd just discover all his internal issues are still there... there's no magic solution to life. Like the 'mirror' you mentioned, John D, ...society won't see him the way he wishes it would see him. People will flee from even a Real Live Pretty Girl... if her screwed-up brain is full-tilt haywire.
Heck-- Fang lives with his mother-- he should be able to see that, while beautiful when she was young... sensible people steered clear of her. His own father stuck-around for love of young Fang-- with all his quirks. Not because his mom was once pretty.

But... Fang initiates conversations with me about all-this... and shuts-down & flees when as soon as I start giving my actual opinion. He dreads hearing it.

#408

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I’ve been looking at SMLE IIIs recently - purely from a historical perspective of course.

In a perfect world I’d like a pre III* (ie straight III) Lithgow model with cutoff, volley sights and windage dial.
And for it to be in a serviceable state. That places it sub 1915.

If I’m dreaming, I’d complete with 17” quillion bayonet. ($$).

Pretty rare. A good quality III* is around $1700.

In NSW, to get a licence I’d have to

Join a gun club, remain a member and demonstrate at least 4 annual structured “shoots”.
Attend (and pass) a safe shooting course
Background checks
Install a gun safe
Submit to regular on premise police inspections of storage protocols
Complete a seperate application for each firearm ....

Mine is a '17, so too bad there. Nice rifle though. In the old days of the 80s you had to reload to afford to shoot the thing, as .303 was harder to find than hen's teeth. Now the rounds are relatively common, no idea why. I'm going to sell it very soon, as it's sitting in a safe in Oregon, along with some other antique firearms and reloading stuff. My kids are spoiled, and all prefer semi-auto, so there's no point in keeping them.

As to your license and stuff, I got mine from my grandpa, and I could and did shoot it from my backyard. The good I'm days. We now have a law in Washington State that says all firearms must be secured, which will do fuck-all to curb violence but which is great for gun safe sales.

#409

The Black Hebrew Israelites literally look like Muslim Brotherhood and Planet Of The Apes had a baby.
Change My Mind

#410

Baboon check...
https://i.imgur.com/NWix1If.jpg?

https://archive.is/lCOkZ

#411

"Be happy with the skin you're in," was the refrain we were taught in health class in the early 80s. Unless you're gay, in which case Jesus hates you, was the undertone, but I digress. It makes sense. Imagine if instead of trying to change the tenuous dynamic between how you "see yourself" and how the world sees you, you simply accept what you are and learn to live with it. People would be happier, if, instead of coddling everybody's feelings, society collectively told them to toughen up, learn to live with themselves. They know on some level they're fooling themselves, which is why they're so vehement about their pronouns or sexual status or whatever. I blame the self-esteem movement.

#412

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ "Be happy with the skin you're in," was the refrain we were taught in health class in the early 80s. Unless you're gay, in which case Jesus hates you, was the undertone, but I digress. It makes sense. Imagine if instead of trying to change the tenuous dynamic between how you "see yourself" and how the world sees you, you simply accept what you are and learn to live with it. People would be happier, if, instead of coddling everybody's feelings, society collectively told them to toughen up, learn to live with themselves. They know on some level they're fooling themselves, which is why they're so vehement about their pronouns or sexual status or whatever. I blame the self-esteem movement.

old.jpg: (29.46 KiB) Downloaded 129 times

#413

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ "Be happy with the skin you're in," was the refrain we were taught in health class in the early 80s. Unless you're gay, in which case Jesus hates you, was the undertone, but I digress. ....
Code: Select all
old.jpg

:-) Though maybe if enough us do so then we might get some clear skies and smooth sailing ... ;-)

#414

Service Dog wrote: ↑ The Black Hebrew Israelites literally look like Muslim Brotherhood and Planet Of The Apes had a baby.
Change My Mind

:shock: Hard to imagine a more a "shockingly racist" comment - Barr none ... ;-)

#415

John D wrote: ↑
Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:31 am
Good thing I never adopted a native American kid. With their genetic predisposition to alcohol addiction and my predisposition to heavy drinking the kid would have been in big trouble from the start. My Dutch and German heritage at least gives me some protection from the long term effects of drinking...but... I think it primes my desire to drink. But who knows.... maybe I am just weak in spirit.

Nathan Phillips was raised as a Native American till he was five and then raised by a white family. That says a lot I think. How does a rebellious teen go through the transition to adulthood when his parents are "whitemen"? Well... it is not likely to be pretty.

Dutch heritage is associated with a higher risk of heart disease. Just saying. Maybe exercise a bit of caution there.

#416

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑
Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:31 am
Good thing I never adopted a native American kid. With their genetic predisposition to alcohol addiction and my predisposition to heavy drinking the kid would have been in big trouble from the start. My Dutch and German heritage at least gives me some protection from the long term effects of drinking...but... I think it primes my desire to drink. But who knows.... maybe I am just weak in spirit.

Nathan Phillips was raised as a Native American till he was five and then raised by a white family. That says a lot I think. How does a rebellious teen go through the transition to adulthood when his parents are "whitemen"? Well... it is not likely to be pretty.
Dutch heritage is associated with a higher risk of heart disease. Just saying. Maybe exercise a bit of caution there.

A part answer to John's question: Pocohontus & Chief Sitting Bullshit ...

#417

John D wrote: ↑
Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:02 am

MarcusAu wrote: ↑ Do any of us see ourselves as others see us?

I think he question is: Do any of us ACCURATELY see ourselves as others see us? Of course we do not, but this does not affect my argument.

Thank Dog we don't. Where would we be without a certain amount of self-delusion? Some of that NLP self-image training is probably quite useful. Training oneself to increase the size of the mental picture one has of oneself, for instance.

#418

It’s not quite Poland here today. Think I’ll wander down to the Rocks and see if there are any British backpackers having a beer. Failing that I’m sure there will be the requisite counter-culture displays to point at.

#419

https://www.outsideonline.com/2090866/b ... ce=twitter
Russians simply can't bear it...

#420

That's terrible news...

...how did the Socceroos end up in that position?