@Andreyich when you got here you said this thread was shit, but now you wont leave. You're clearly having fun.
1x Like
...each of these studies it links to are peer-edited scientific journals.
I feel like that's a phrase you learned somewhere. They're not, and also as you'll see from the study I linked earlier, the scientific journal is in crisis anyway. BUT FOR THE SAKE OF BEING TOTALLY COOL, I'm going through them each anyway.
But before I get to all that, lemme clarify: I have no problem whatsoever with people doing whatever it is they wanna do with/to/regarding themselves and their lives. I do not care. What bothers me is that I'm being bludgeoned over the head with a political agenda painted to look like science, when it's not. It's the superiority complex and the condescension from a position of ignorance that bothers me. The data does not exist. And it probably won't for a very long time, because any real experimentation into gender identity would be wildly unethical. So, again -- you do you, I'm all about that, but please stop bludgeoning me with fake science.
Now that I've made bold claims about fake science, lemme dig into those linked articles and see how much of an idiot I turn out to look like. Probably a moderately-sized idiot. Well. Let's take a look.
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
1) uhhhh excuse me? Language is constantly evolving and definitions change, it's in its very nature. As we learn more things, we update our connotations--is that not how society progressives?
Doesn't mean that's good, that is should happen or even makes any sense, especially considering 1) how fast it's happening and 2) how little coordination there is in it.
2) I was trying to bring in my personal experience with the topic and bring a bit of humanity to this topic so you would realize that there are very real people associated with this topic in ways that are not simply "trendy." And yeah, gender dysphoria is a mental illness, it fucking sucks. Watching my gf deal with it hurts. Watching her start to overcome it is one of the best feelings I've ever had.
I'm sure. But, I must however commend you at least on agreeing that such a thing is a disorder of sorts/not normal, even though we may not see eye to eye acknowledging such a truth takes a lot of strength and I do have a lot of respect for that.
3) Fat acceptance leads to severe health issues, a lot of the time? Not attacking people who are overweight is generally great, but when someone is obese to the point where it negatively impacts their health, it is dangerous to say "don't care, be yourself!" So long as acceptance does not negatively impact people, what is wrong with it? Also, I would absolutely love for you to cite your source on that. Love the use of generalizations and the loaded language. sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gende… Have a Harvard. I have some more formal studies as well.
I mean, that's really the point. I'll use your pronoun as long as it's not some crazy bullshit like "adfazad'gexe" but wanting to chop off your shit is pretty whacko. You stop emos/self-amputators from chopping their shit don't you? I know that I see it as my moral duty do so for sure.
But you want studies? here are but a few
About 88% of children who have gender dysphoria do not hold those beliefs when they grow older. Source: npr.org/templates/story/story.php?sto…
MRI scans indicate that MtF transsexuals are either men aroused by the thought of possessing female genitalia or homosexuals who want to seduce straight men. Source: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3180619 (this in essence just means that these are people who have a poor understanding of their sexual kinks/fetishes because they were repressed or simply not explored) or are just people who aren't really hot enough and want a bit of a boost by looking more feminine
Oh and here's an important one
Transsexuals who undergo sex reassignment surgery are more likely to commit suicide. Source: journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=… so yeah, sexual reassignment surgery is more or less evil by it's very nature
Their status could of course be a result of their other issues
Transsexuals are more likely to have autism than the general population. Source: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00…
Of course, you're free to """debunk""" these.
4) It blatantly denies scientific evidence and uses biased, unconfirmed resources so it's wrong. :((( This also goes for more liberal sites like HuffPost!
Literally all scientific studies are biased, everyone is setting out to accomplish something with their research.
5) Indeed, they are! Want some peer-reviewed studies?
I won't address this since it's adressed elsewhere
6) Sympathy and empathy are both rather important, and I may have misworded my phrase a bit. But let me tell you, differing opinions can be dehumanizing wmd harmful. "I don't like this show," that's an opinion, that's fine. "I don't think you should have equal rights and also your identity is made up" is generally pretty harmful.
It's still dumb, and sometimes empathy with someone only strengthens these seemingly contrarian-perspectives. I think people should have equal rights, particularly when they are guaranteed by state but I don't see what's so bad about saying "your identity is made up." At least, if they can prove me wrong they'll feel a whole lot better.
7) I came in this thread to educate. Education is the greatest cure to inequality and bigoted views, and if we respect one another and recognize legitimate differences, the world gets better, little by little.
Which definition of bigotry are we using?
We agree on that! Bill is using a more modern version of the term. It would really be better if he talked about gamete production but he isn't talking to an audience of biologists.
However shall they manage? Kids these days with their new fangled words and redefining of concepts. Language belongs to everyone and sometimes language can be changed to reflect new nuance. Rejoice that there is yet undiscovered linguistic territory to explore!
Exactly. This is an attempt to revive the famed reputation as educator of a children of a man to keep on indoctrinating children with a political agenda and yes I know how much like Alex Jones I sound right now but fug off
We live in an era of standardization, I for one fucking hate it when I have to wake up and suddenly a word has an unclear but new meaning, making a whole of my old uses of it not PC which in turn makes me liable to be fired or not accepted for a whole lot of work positions, in the West anyway. Besides, changing definition of gender only shortens linguistic boundaries because it makes them a whole lot more confusing and we can no longer look to the roots of the word. Don't repurpose old words, make new ones and leave my lovelies alone.
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
Ah, such a lovely introduction to this forum. I absolutely love the smell of bigotry in the morning, I'm sure trans folks would feel absolutely welcomed on this forum!
psmag.com/social-justice/what-you-nee… Here's a list of peer-reviewed studies on transgender folks. You can bash me for it coming from a liberal site, etc, I just don't feel like copy and pasting everything and each of these studies it links to are peer-edited scientific journals. I understand that swaying your opinions is probably impossible, but I shall persist still, hoping at least to plant seeds of fact and sympathy in the minds of those reading.
Lol already the buzzwords are thrown. You did take longer than I thought.
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
Ah Night, I too was once young and innocent. Actually studies show that although people almost never change their mind in the teeth of a debate, the ideas you expose them to do tend to eat away at their certainties. We can hope that a positive effect might one day be achieved, even if we dont see it.
"They're wrong and will never change their opinions but yeah I won't change mine :^))))"
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
This is why I exclusively post in Old English, its what the Venerable Bede and the Beowulf author would have wanted.
This isn't the middle ages, as said earlier we are in an era of standardization.
You would think it would work that way but that isn't what the evidence would suggest. People invest their identity in their opinions and they don't easily give it up. Even in cases where your opinion is made manifestly untrue by new evidence, there is still a part of you that immediately denies it. I suspect it varies with the importance you attach to a particular opinion but I cant claim to be an expert in the field.
As earlier said you are pretty adamant in your beliefs too, so don't try to mock me and mdk for staunchness in our's.
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
@Andreyich when you got here you said this thread was shit, but now you wont leave. You're clearly having fun.
What can I say, I get hooked into debates/conversations that will do nothing but make my peer relationships worse and leave bitterness between me and others with no progress. But what happens, happens. I ain't backing out yet, not that much of a pussy.
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
twitter.com/RTUKnews/status/876598733…
huh, looks like wypipo are trying to even out the score in the game where nobody wins
EDIT: This might just be RT being sensationalist, no other source says it was muslims/near a mosque
bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40322960
EDIT2:
nope my first suggestion was right
huh, looks like wypipo are trying to even out the score in the game where nobody wins
EDIT: This might just be RT being sensationalist, no other source says it was muslims/near a mosque
bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40322960
EDIT2:
nope my first suggestion was right
NightinGem amateur journalist, professional pokememer
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
Sigh. This reminds me of the argument I had last night with a girl who insisted the military does not owe its soldiers mental healthcare because they knew what they were getting into and they should have known better. Not the same argument by any means, but a similar scenario in which opinions will most likely not be changed and nothing productive is being accomplished. I shall leave this thread now, satisfied with the evidence I have provided, and move on to more productive things. I hope you all have wonderful days, and reconsider your narrow-minded ideals. And by the way, "buzzwords" are present on both sides of arguments, and can be used in productive manner. Until you are ready to truly consider both sides of the argument in terms of both facts and the implications for the lives of transgender folks, I am leaving this thread. I've got other things to do, such as preparing to move into an apartment with my girlfriend, helping plan her HRT appointments, and having truly objective and civil discussion elsewhere. Call me a pussy, call me a liberal shill, an SJW who backs down, etc, etc.
1x Like
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
Nice blog post
METHODS: Data gathered on 97 consecutive patients <21 years, with initial visits between January 1998 and February 2010, who fulfilled the following criteria: long-standing cross-gender behaviors, provided letters from current mental health professional, and parental support. Main descriptive measures included gender, age, Tanner stage, history of gender identity development, and psychiatric comorbidity.
CONCLUSION: After establishment of a multidisciplinary gender clinic, the gender identity disorder population increased fourfold.
that's, I mean...... that would seem to indicate that incidence correlates pretty strongly with attention. BUT, that's not an assertion made by the abstract and I'm doing like FIVE of these so I'll leave it at "historical data analysis with inconclusive methodology." This article tells me that people were treated. It does not investigate (in fact it makes a totally valid effort to NOT investigate) whether or not it's "real" in the sense of the debate. MY POINT BEING: this tells us that suddenly this is happening for way more people; it says nothing else.
Method
The sample consisted of 127 adolescents (79 boys, 48 girls), who were referred for GD in childhood (<12 years of age) and followed up in adolescence. We examined childhood differences among persisters and desisters in demographics, psychological functioning, quality of peer relations and childhood GD, and adolescent reports of GD, body image, and sexual orientation. We examined contributions of childhood factors on the probability of persistence of GD into adolescence.
Conclusion
Intensity of early GD appears to be an important predictor of persistence of GD. Clinical recommendations for the support of children with GD may need to be developed independently for natal boys and for girls, as the presentation of boys and girls with GD is different, and different factors are predictive for the persistence of GD.
Better methodology than 1, with more insight. GD intensity is pretty hard to quantify in any scientific way (you've taken a personality test before, they're not super precise).... but charting that against persistence is interesting. Anyway the fact that it can come and go is a strong argument for environmental factors. THAT SAID, once again the scope is limited and we shouldn't draw too many conclusions from a sample size of 127. Still though, this one is the most scientific thus far.
(report by the Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the National Center for Transgender Equality)
Not peer-reviewed, not scientific, not a journal. Not saying ignore the hardships or the mistreatment -- just saying.
"BUT MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS DO LEAD TO BETTER PSYCHOLOGICAL OUTCOMES" bullet -- summarized together
Yeah but..... It doesn't sound like the scope of these two articles can be considered reasonable, because the long-term outcomes are really bad.
paywall
But the summary says that it's "still a mystery," and discusses the many inconsistencies among research. It's not settled science.
VERDICT: I'm not a complete and total idiot, the articles linked here are not directly addressing the issue (incidentally I'm still not positive what the issue is, exactly), and they're certainly not conclusive.
This isn't the middle ages,
I wish that were more apparent.
as said earlier we are in an era of standardization.
Clearly this isn't true as we now use gender slightly differently. You could easily demonstrate hundreds of words whose meanings have shifted subtly or drastically. Language changes, people can not want it to, but linguistics marches on!
As earlier said you are pretty adamant in your beliefs too, so don't try to mock me and mdk for staunchness in our's.
Sure and it is possible you will convince me of your points. It hasn't happened yet but of course I am subject to the same instinctive defensiveness I just described. I'm not intentionally trying to mock your beliefs but not all ideas are equally worthy of respect.
1x Like
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
10 mos ago
@Andreyich Yo
I'm not Belarusian, in fact skin tone wise, I'm quite brown.
Would you have a problem if I dated someone with roots/descendents in your country?
I'm not Belarusian, in fact skin tone wise, I'm quite brown.
Would you have a problem if I dated someone with roots/descendents in your country?
1x Like
The Harbinger of Ferocity
Member
Seen
3 yrs ago
All of these will be responses in timeline order for the sake of completeness so that it does not give the illusion that I am ignoring you or avoiding your points.
Humanity will have unquestionably been rendered extinct by itself or some greater force long before any semblance of "eternity" will ever be meted out. Anything that optimistic is hopelessly optimistic and cannot even be argued to; it is as "irrational" as the faith or religious systems you seem to hold aversion to. Mankind is a very, very new addition to the Earth, let alone the existence of the universe. Believing the human animal will somehow radically change will still being classifiable as human is unlikely.
With regard to hunger, I sincerely doubt that as well for any number of reasons. No less, I must admit I do not find myself readily concerned with it. Any sufficiently advanced ability to resolve that beyond reasonable failure has far more dangerous implications that would overshadow it. Namely that mankind has reached a point where there is no scarcity of resources, competition or internal conflict.
The atheistic upsurge is no different than any other faith. People traded their old gods for the new gods of "reason" and "logic", with the same willingness to blindly pursue them as they would anything else and or equally turn a blind eye to what does not fit their agenda. What I personally mean by this, is that religion or spirituality might falter in terms of raw numbers, but they are unlikely to ever become a factor of non-influence by being relegated to an irrelevant minority. I have stronger faith in the human desire to believe there's more to themselves than just assuming they appeared on this rock at absolute pure chance. Dealing with people, history suggests no less to me as well that people will turn to belief rather than fact when their realities falter, rather their perceptions or understandings of them.
Religion makes claims based on its belief system and calls them fact. It is a factor of belief. If they did not believe that God created man, they would not exactly be adhering to their religious tenants. No less in such an argument, there's no victory to be had there. Science has to disprove god as much as believers have to prove god. This is no new problem either and it helps none that religious doctrine as of late has become so vast and varied that there is no way to account for all the different claims.
The "training wheels" of humanity is the foolish notion that it knows anything. Man should only know that it knows nothing and will be forever in pursuit of understanding it. It is the same train of logic that makes adolescents so loathed by adults. They are under the illusion they know anything and everything because they, somehow above all others, have all the answers; I've met more of those of faith who willingly admit they will never understand or think they know everything other than what they are taught to believe in their doctrine - I have met many others who believe in nothing but are convinced they somehow hold all the secrets to the universe.
To be blunt, I would rather take the religious "bible-thumping evangelist" than the "know-it-all pseudointellectual atheist", no matter how worthy of cringe either might be deserving of.
Yes, that is exactly what I said and the context is still important. If a university is having students not only break facility code, but break the law, and the police are being forced to stand down, the only reasonable option is to order the National Guard to restore control. This is a lawful execution of reasonable non-lethal force and a strong signal that violent outbursts will not be tolerated. I have backed this statement before in this topic in a myriad of ways. Please do not attempt to use my quote to somehow add misguided emphasis to an unrelated point.
In short, if your reaction as a student, in many cases a legal adult, is to riot, commit arson and or assault, as well as sympathize or support those that do, you are subject to penalty and should be without mercy. I would not feel an ounce of remorse if the guardsmen beat people senseless with asps, batons or rifle stocks for disorderly conduct. The person breaking the law was aware of the consequences from the moment they failed to comply.
To emphasize the difference, dissent in a reasonable, non-violent forum is acceptable in a college or university - as it should be by design - but if this cannot be respected on either side of the fence, any involved should be subject to reprimand.
Given the subject has changed again over the past few hours, I will throw my commentary on this in.
I am not obliged to entertain you or your specific desires or wants; there is no special treatment to be had here as you might already know of my ethos and code. There are two actual genders, sexes, or what have you in the context of human beings. Everything else is either a construct of a disorder or something artificially crafted. There's too much time wasted in going about acknowledging however many different identities people have. Until I know you, I have no personal or moral obligation to concede to your standards. No less, if you are even having any interaction with someone, just do what you need to do and get on with life. Unless you have somehow already endeared yourself to me or are something I cannot avoid, I am not going to expend time or resources making concessions. I hold myself to these same standards, in that I expect nothing from people and rather want nothing to do with people. I do not expect or want them to appeal to my personal issues or qualities, as nice as they might be, out of principal alone.
I will leave that to those I actually wish to spend time with, if any at all.
So that leaves only this.
Despite how much I might disdain a number of the opinions expressed and apparent desires of those in this forum, I will again say this has remained one of the most civil and relatively grounded topics I have ever seen on the internet involving any of these subjects, even among some locales that are notorious for their homogenous thinking. This is not to say it is perfect, but this is far from the dystopia that this comment venomously implies. No less, this is the exact thing I loathe more than anything else when taking part in these discussions. It is nothing short of some sickly, ill fated, completely baseless remark coming from a place of assumed superiority.
This is the exact sort of thinking that causes fewer and fewer people to take non-traditionalism seriously now. The smug virtue signaling is not endearing or beneficial.
Eternity is a long time, especially towards the end.
Although the likelihood is we will wipe ourselves out before the heat death of the universe.
Hunger has also existed since prehistory. It dosent seem unreasonable that it could one day be conquered. There has been an enormous upsurge in atheistic sentiment in the past hundred years or so. With any luck it can continue. It might take millennia more, but I believe in us!
Humanity will have unquestionably been rendered extinct by itself or some greater force long before any semblance of "eternity" will ever be meted out. Anything that optimistic is hopelessly optimistic and cannot even be argued to; it is as "irrational" as the faith or religious systems you seem to hold aversion to. Mankind is a very, very new addition to the Earth, let alone the existence of the universe. Believing the human animal will somehow radically change will still being classifiable as human is unlikely.
With regard to hunger, I sincerely doubt that as well for any number of reasons. No less, I must admit I do not find myself readily concerned with it. Any sufficiently advanced ability to resolve that beyond reasonable failure has far more dangerous implications that would overshadow it. Namely that mankind has reached a point where there is no scarcity of resources, competition or internal conflict.
The atheistic upsurge is no different than any other faith. People traded their old gods for the new gods of "reason" and "logic", with the same willingness to blindly pursue them as they would anything else and or equally turn a blind eye to what does not fit their agenda. What I personally mean by this, is that religion or spirituality might falter in terms of raw numbers, but they are unlikely to ever become a factor of non-influence by being relegated to an irrelevant minority. I have stronger faith in the human desire to believe there's more to themselves than just assuming they appeared on this rock at absolute pure chance. Dealing with people, history suggests no less to me as well that people will turn to belief rather than fact when their realities falter, rather their perceptions or understandings of them.
Religion makes scientific claims. It always has. God created man, earth is the center of the universe and so on. In so much as religion makes false and baseless claims it IS the duty of science to disprove it. There are religions that have minimal supernaturalism which are less in conflict with a scientific world view but so long as religion makes claims about the nature of the universe it is advancing a hypothesis which can and should be tested in the realm of science.
I'll continue to hope that with enough time and education we can outgrow the training wheels of our species.
Religion makes claims based on its belief system and calls them fact. It is a factor of belief. If they did not believe that God created man, they would not exactly be adhering to their religious tenants. No less in such an argument, there's no victory to be had there. Science has to disprove god as much as believers have to prove god. This is no new problem either and it helps none that religious doctrine as of late has become so vast and varied that there is no way to account for all the different claims.
The "training wheels" of humanity is the foolish notion that it knows anything. Man should only know that it knows nothing and will be forever in pursuit of understanding it. It is the same train of logic that makes adolescents so loathed by adults. They are under the illusion they know anything and everything because they, somehow above all others, have all the answers; I've met more of those of faith who willingly admit they will never understand or think they know everything other than what they are taught to believe in their doctrine - I have met many others who believe in nothing but are convinced they somehow hold all the secrets to the universe.
To be blunt, I would rather take the religious "bible-thumping evangelist" than the "know-it-all pseudointellectual atheist", no matter how worthy of cringe either might be deserving of.
I believe it to be a natural and needed reaction from Americans to restore order if law enforcement will not. At what point I find that to end, is when the police begin doing their job, albeit I still advocate the deployment of National Guard units to restore order and as a show of force regardless.
We were talking at one point about how universities were lawless places that needed intervention. Also we use the word national alot in this thread!
Yes, that is exactly what I said and the context is still important. If a university is having students not only break facility code, but break the law, and the police are being forced to stand down, the only reasonable option is to order the National Guard to restore control. This is a lawful execution of reasonable non-lethal force and a strong signal that violent outbursts will not be tolerated. I have backed this statement before in this topic in a myriad of ways. Please do not attempt to use my quote to somehow add misguided emphasis to an unrelated point.
In short, if your reaction as a student, in many cases a legal adult, is to riot, commit arson and or assault, as well as sympathize or support those that do, you are subject to penalty and should be without mercy. I would not feel an ounce of remorse if the guardsmen beat people senseless with asps, batons or rifle stocks for disorderly conduct. The person breaking the law was aware of the consequences from the moment they failed to comply.
To emphasize the difference, dissent in a reasonable, non-violent forum is acceptable in a college or university - as it should be by design - but if this cannot be respected on either side of the fence, any involved should be subject to reprimand.
Given the subject has changed again over the past few hours, I will throw my commentary on this in.
I am not obliged to entertain you or your specific desires or wants; there is no special treatment to be had here as you might already know of my ethos and code. There are two actual genders, sexes, or what have you in the context of human beings. Everything else is either a construct of a disorder or something artificially crafted. There's too much time wasted in going about acknowledging however many different identities people have. Until I know you, I have no personal or moral obligation to concede to your standards. No less, if you are even having any interaction with someone, just do what you need to do and get on with life. Unless you have somehow already endeared yourself to me or are something I cannot avoid, I am not going to expend time or resources making concessions. I hold myself to these same standards, in that I expect nothing from people and rather want nothing to do with people. I do not expect or want them to appeal to my personal issues or qualities, as nice as they might be, out of principal alone.
I will leave that to those I actually wish to spend time with, if any at all.
So that leaves only this.
Ah, such a lovely introduction to this forum. I absolutely love the smell of bigotry in the morning, I'm sure trans folks would feel absolutely welcomed on this forum!
Despite how much I might disdain a number of the opinions expressed and apparent desires of those in this forum, I will again say this has remained one of the most civil and relatively grounded topics I have ever seen on the internet involving any of these subjects, even among some locales that are notorious for their homogenous thinking. This is not to say it is perfect, but this is far from the dystopia that this comment venomously implies. No less, this is the exact thing I loathe more than anything else when taking part in these discussions. It is nothing short of some sickly, ill fated, completely baseless remark coming from a place of assumed superiority.
This is the exact sort of thinking that causes fewer and fewer people to take non-traditionalism seriously now. The smug virtue signaling is not endearing or beneficial.
1x Like
@The Harbinger of Ferocity
Segregation, Interracial marriage, homosexual rights, trans rights. The moral arc of the universe and all that.
A decade or two from now trans people will be in the same position as homosexuals are today. Not perfect but an acceptable part of the mainstream. Conservative forces, just like they did for those other categories, will bitch and whine the whole way but it won't make a difference.
I'll be out there advocating.
To quote Bob Dylan: Times they are a-chaingin'
Segregation, Interracial marriage, homosexual rights, trans rights. The moral arc of the universe and all that.
A decade or two from now trans people will be in the same position as homosexuals are today. Not perfect but an acceptable part of the mainstream. Conservative forces, just like they did for those other categories, will bitch and whine the whole way but it won't make a difference.
I'll be out there advocating.
To quote Bob Dylan: Times they are a-chaingin'
2x Like
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
10 mos ago
@NightinGem I admire your passion, and while I may not agree with you approach in its entirety, I'm definately in your corner when it comes to fighting for equal treatment.
However, what I don't admire is your condescending tone, everyone in this thread for the most part have been able to make their arguments without being needlessly smug. Your points will have a greater impact when they are delivered with respect.
However, what I don't admire is your condescending tone, everyone in this thread for the most part have been able to make their arguments without being needlessly smug. Your points will have a greater impact when they are delivered with respect.
1x Like
Andreyich AS THOUGH A THOUSAND MOUTHS CRY OUT IN PAIN
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
@Dynamo Frokane
Not really. My quote for such occurrences is "once you go black we don't want you back." I can't really stop people's relationships, and I can't blame people for liking our girls who are awfully pretty, but I'd just be somewhat dissappointed in a supposed Belarusian girl you would be dating for not really wanting to preserve what we are. Might be racist, I don't care. Our culture and language is already fading (for which I am admittedly guilty of too, I speak Russian and even English better than Belarusian) and I don't want to have us lost to time, to have the brown hair and green eyes gone.
But my point is that this isn't good. We do use things differently, but I would be wholly happy to use your definition if absolutely everyone including any all dictionaries would agree to it.
Anyone can say that and use it for the other side in an argument/debate/etc.etc.
Not really. My quote for such occurrences is "once you go black we don't want you back." I can't really stop people's relationships, and I can't blame people for liking our girls who are awfully pretty, but I'd just be somewhat dissappointed in a supposed Belarusian girl you would be dating for not really wanting to preserve what we are. Might be racist, I don't care. Our culture and language is already fading (for which I am admittedly guilty of too, I speak Russian and even English better than Belarusian) and I don't want to have us lost to time, to have the brown hair and green eyes gone.
Clearly this isn't true as we now use gender slightly differently. You could easily demonstrate hundreds of words whose meanings have shifted subtly or drastically. Language changes, people can not want it to, but linguistics marches on!
But my point is that this isn't good. We do use things differently, but I would be wholly happy to use your definition if absolutely everyone including any all dictionaries would agree to it.
Sure and it is possible you will convince me of your points. It hasn't happened yet but of course I am subject to the same instinctive defensiveness I just described. I'm not intentionally trying to mock your beliefs but not all ideas are equally worthy of respect.
Anyone can say that and use it for the other side in an argument/debate/etc.etc.
NightinGem amateur journalist, professional pokememer
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
@Dynamo Frokane I apologize if I came across that way, I'm still working on not seeming condescending. I'm not the best with tone and know I sometimes come across that way, plus when I get heated I often end up lapsing into what can definitely be considered haughty, smug language. I never intended to convey a lack of respect, I thought I was just posting facts and aaaargh this is the thing which always happens in my English classes, I'm sorry. Not sorry for attempting to further the knowledge of civil rights, but I'm sorry if it seems like I was treating folks derisively. >>
1x Like
OP
Dolerman Chrysalis Form
Member
Seen
10 mos ago
@Andreyich Alright that's disappointing to hear, but thanks for being clear and honest.
Would you feel the same if the girl I was dating wasn't belarusian, like maybe bulgarian or serbain or even italian instead?
Would you feel the same if the girl I was dating wasn't belarusian, like maybe bulgarian or serbain or even italian instead?
1x Like
NightinGem amateur journalist, professional pokememer
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
@Andreyich ...dude, you literally just admitted to racism. And you don't care? Shouldn't who the Belarusian girl loves be more important than "preserving her culture?" She's "supposed," so she can't be Belarusian if she doesn't keep the bloodline pure? I can't really understand valuing the forced continuation of a culture as opposed to allowing people to cultivate their own happiness. But I'm guessing I can't change your mind.
My girlfriend is Polish and I'm Italian. Am I a traitor to my race? Are we both? Just a hypothetical question.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/…
Also, it seems that the most prominent dictionaries have updated their meanings.
My girlfriend is Polish and I'm Italian. Am I a traitor to my race? Are we both? Just a hypothetical question.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/…
Also, it seems that the most prominent dictionaries have updated their meanings.
© 2007-2024