Reply With Quote
there is though
anybody can use the search function and dig up old posts
but its no secret that my politics have changed with time. i've been open about the fact that i voted for romney in 2012
If only there was an archive...
You're so woke bro!
there is though
anybody can use the search function and dig up old posts
but its no secret that my politics have changed with time. i've been open about the fact that i voted for romney in 2012
Grade school, middle school, high school, college, a few years ago or half a decade ago? You were so woke back as a child?
You're so woke my joke flew right over your head Mr/Ms/Miss/Xim/Beep/Bop Serious.there is though
anybody can use the search function and dig up old posts
but its no secret that my politics have changed with time. i've been open about the fact that i voted for romney in 2012
I'm sure most people here do, but convenient epiphany to suit the moment isn't grounds for a solid debate. It also doesn't really matter what you believe, only what you can argue for/against successfully. Surely you know this as well.
But you have the term "theory" in science to use as a reference. Where do you have "sex reveal" anywhere but strip clubs?
His paralegal knows this... You're giving too much credit to that biased sjw lawyer tbh.
"The preconditions for serious argument do not yet exist, please join me in a moment of mournful recognition of the discussion that could not take place here today."
*bows head solemnly*
agreed. if yesterday i was ting on trans people and i took this stance today, it would be pretty suspect. i dont think thats the case, though.
depends. people vote based on what they believe, not based on what they can successfully argue for.It also doesn't really matter what you believe, only what you can argue for/against successfully. Surely you know this as well.
but if you're talking about this type of forum or public arena/conversation, then yeah i agree. people can grift or play devil's advocate.
i dont usually hold strong opinions on matters that im not familiar enough to be able to argue for. the "trans question" isn't one that i really thought of much at all. really it in law school that i took a sports law class and le IX was a pretty significant portion of that class. i did a lot of reading on the issue first as it related to athletics, and then sorta just on my own for general purposes.
well not "sex reveal" or "gender reveal"... but "sex" and "gender" certainly. so identifying exactly what you are "revealing" is still useful
Discussions devolve into personal beliefs and no one here can successfully argue against someone else's personal beliefs. You can only argue against supposed facts and conclusions based on them. It's a fact that currently "sex reveal parties" are basically non-existent. Just Google the term and you'll be redirected to "Gender reveal". That doesn't prove right or wrong, it only shows where we are currently. Just as you cannot be held accountable for an opinion you no longer hold (maybe legally you can), you cannot wish someone into the future and condemn them when they refuse to play along.
You try so hard to be interesting. It's almost pitiful.
oh well, you can't please everybody
I never disputed that people call them gender reveal parties and not sex reveal parties so this isn’t a point of contention. I posited explanations as to why that’s the case. That doesn’t change that if you wanted to go with more academic terms, sex would be a more accurate descriptor. But as long as people generally understand what’s being communicated, there’s enough utility there. I also acknowledge that the colloquial equivocation between sex and gender make it more difficult to have the conversations I was trying to have.
can you elaborate on or explain the last thing you said re wishing people into the future?
Kind of hilarious that you're ceding word definition authority to people who rig up a piñata of their college mascot to explode into pink or blue shrapnel for an Instagram story.
Sure.
If you can go back 6 years and find that you held a different opinion, does that mean you were wrong then or that you're wrong now? Or is it even an issue of right and wrong? Give yourself 6 years from that opinion and you get to where you are now. So when you take someone else's opinion that you feel needs to evolve into a more "woke" outlook and treat it as archaic, you're basically telling them to have a similar epiphany as you and come to the same conclusion. They might one day, but you cannot just wish them past that 6 year learning curve.
And you're ceding it to someone who cut their own penis off, put on a dress and has a at least 45% suicide attempt rate.
This is nonsense. Basically you should never argue a position because it might take a long time for the other guy to come around
my opinions changed as the information i had did. They were based off of ignorance of what i know now. Time passing isn’t what magically changed my outlook, but rather the introduction of new information. If i had the same info presented to me years earlier, i likely would have adopted my current view earlier as well
A) An individual would not have a suicide rate
b) do you have anything to support a contention that a transgender person is behind the definition of gender?
So you didn't have access to information but could access Spurstalk ok?
Uhh. Sure?
i don’t know about you, but Spurstalk isn’t my only source of information from which my worldview is based on
hurr durr muh editing fiasco
But it was just a few years ago? This is your contention.
Dim See is trying to find another angle so he can declare victory.
He's getting a little panicky.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions