Who will replace Hillary Clinton on the Democrat ticket?

[Forty Two]

What does it matter what I believe? Was what I wrote accurate? If not, how have I got it wrong?

It's not about what you believe but what you communicate. Your ironic tone would suggest that you don't think gender is or can be fluid, that it bears some relation to physical form and therefore physical form denotes what pronoun should apply, that it is some kind of natural fact determined at birth, so that a person in a female body should always and only ever be seen as and referred to as female, and that people should not undermine this kind of natural fact by requesting that others respect their understanding of who and what they think and feel they are.

If you don't think any of this why do you keep banging on about it and sneering at those who express a contrary view?

To be fair, Forty Two may only be sneering at the extreme end of the gender argument, which can indeed be rather absurd, and deserving of mockery.

However, methinks his mockery creeps downwards towards the middle ground...

I'm an equal opportunity sneerer.

You'll have to define the middle ground. There is definitely a major point of contention in these discussions that usually remains unresolved - what is extreme and what is middle?

[pErvinalia]

modern gender studies theory

What's what now?

Gender is something we "identify" as and it is "fluid" so it can change over time, but whatever one identifies as at any given time, they want to say is determined for them, and they were "born this way."

What's with the quotes? Can you provide examples of a person who holds that gender is both "fluid" and something they were born as?

If you don't think any of this why do you keep banging on about it and sneering at those who express a contrary view?

Well, because issues are fun and interesting to discuss, for one thing. Issues of gender and sexuality are not sacrosanct. Religious people say stuff like that. If you don't believe in god, why do you keep arguing about whether he doesn't exist? Why do you keep banging on about god or religion if you don't believe any of it? Well, because (a) it's interesting, (b) it's philosophical, (c) it effects our culture, law and daily life and therefore every citizen has a right to discuss the issues. That kind of thing -- same for the gender issues.

Sneering at those who express a contrary view? Like discussions with religious folks, it's really very hard to get someone in that camp to focus and present exactly what their view is in any coherent form. It's all very mushy. But, much my "sneering" (I'd suggest comical mockery and light ridicule, but if you prefer sneering as a term, fine), involves discussions where something from the progressive, identity politics camp is said that appears self-contradictory and strange. Like when some SJW person argues that wearing a Trump hat is "hate speech," and that "all white people are racist, all cisgendered people are transphobic, all straight people are homophobic....", or when they claim to be interested in equality but actively protest funding for a men's mental health center, or when they claim to be for free speech, but they disrupt peaceful conferences being held in college classrooms and pull fire alarms or commandeer stages and threaten speakers....or when a professor calls for "muscle" to get a student reporter off of public property because she didn't want a rally filmed and reported on, or when Yale identity politics weirdos accost a professor because the professor's wife said that adults in college don't need someone telling them what Halloween costumes to wear....or when they bleat on about women being discriminated against in universities when women make up 60% of the students, 60% of the graduates, and receive more financial aid and campus support programs than men....when when they bleat on about "wage gaps" when almost all of any identified difference in wages results from (a) the number of hours worked, and (b) the choices in careers where women tend to choose lower paying industries and jobs and men tend to choose more difficult and dangerous jobs that tend to be higher paying. That kind of thing.

[/quote]

What's that got to do with your mockery of the concept of gender fluidity?

[DaveDodo007]

She has been having strange seizures and freezing.

No she hasn't. Perhaps in the mind of the loony right who desperately want to see jesus in their toast.

Talk about projecting, these videos are out there so feel free to ignore them and continue to live in your bubble.

[pErvinalia]

I've seen them all. I even pointed out how the one that 42 has used in this (or another) thread is manipulated to look worse than what happened. There's a sad desperation from those on the right.

[DaveDodo007]

I've seen them all. I even pointed out how the one that 42 has used in this (or another) thread is manipulated to look worse than what happened. There's a sad desperation from those on the right.

There is no desperation from those on the right, trust me when I say Hillary needs to be at least alive during the debates. To you lefty/liberals this is just another election though that is not the case with us conservatives, There is a short window with which we have to defeat the 'open borders', 'Globalism' and the corporatist and the bankers, neo cons all of them. We wouldn't have chosen Trump if we had other options but he stood up to the plate and it is him or nothing. There is no 'ism' or 'insult' you can aim at Trump or us supporters that would affect his support as this is the hill we have choson to die on. Nothing else matters to us but a Trump victory, this is where we stand and this is where we fight. A trump defeat means that corporates and their 'useful idiots' now run the planet, socialism with corporate approval is not going to bode well for humanity.

[pErvinalia]

Nice non-sequitur.

[JimC]

"Socialism with corporate approval", eh...

Pretend socialism maybe...

[Forty Two]

modern gender studies theory

What's what now?

Modern gender theory -- that which is studied in "Gender Studies" courses.

Gender is something we "identify" as and it is "fluid" so it can change over time, but whatever one identifies as at any given time, they want to say is determined for them, and they were "born this way."

What's with the quotes? Can you provide examples of a person who holds that gender is both "fluid" and something they were born as?

Here's one who says she was "assigned" female at birth, but is gender fluid. http://groupthink.kinja.com/i-am-genderfluid-1558789334

For me, it means that sometimes I am a woman, sometimes I am a man, and sometimes I am androgynous. I do not mean that sometimes I feel manly; in every internal sense, I am a man in those moments. My partner noticed that I hold myself differently, walk differently, speak differently, even interact with people differently depending on my gender identification. This isn't the same as being transgender, as I do not feel that I am always one gender. There are many times where I experience very acute gender dysphoria (female pronouns, looking very female, etc. when I am male or androgynous), but, when I am female, I don't. Genderfluidity is often included under the banner of genderqueer, which includes most non-binary gender identities. (The purple, white, and green colors are the genderqueer flag!)

Somehow, these folks can tell the difference between "feeling" like a man, and actually "being" a man in "every internal sense." This woman is claiming to "be" both man and woman depending on the time of day -- not just expressing certain actions or stereotypical appearances -- but actually changing between a man and a woman "internally."

If you don't think any of this why do you keep banging on about it and sneering at those who express a contrary view?

Well, because issues are fun and interesting to discuss, for one thing. Issues of gender and sexuality are not sacrosanct. Religious people say stuff like that. If you don't believe in god, why do you keep arguing about whether he doesn't exist? Why do you keep banging on about god or religion if you don't believe any of it? Well, because (a) it's interesting, (b) it's philosophical, (c) it effects our culture, law and daily life and therefore every citizen has a right to discuss the issues. That kind of thing -- same for the gender issues.

Sneering at those who express a contrary view? Like discussions with religious folks, it's really very hard to get someone in that camp to focus and present exactly what their view is in any coherent form. It's all very mushy. But, much my "sneering" (I'd suggest comical mockery and light ridicule, but if you prefer sneering as a term, fine), involves discussions where something from the progressive, identity politics camp is said that appears self-contradictory and strange. Like when some SJW person argues that wearing a Trump hat is "hate speech," and that "all white people are racist, all cisgendered people are transphobic, all straight people are homophobic....", or when they claim to be interested in equality but actively protest funding for a men's mental health center, or when they claim to be for free speech, but they disrupt peaceful conferences being held in college classrooms and pull fire alarms or commandeer stages and threaten speakers....or when a professor calls for "muscle" to get a student reporter off of public property because she didn't want a rally filmed and reported on, or when Yale identity politics weirdos accost a professor because the professor's wife said that adults in college don't need someone telling them what Halloween costumes to wear....or when they bleat on about women being discriminated against in universities when women make up 60% of the students, 60% of the graduates, and receive more financial aid and campus support programs than men....when when they bleat on about "wage gaps" when almost all of any identified difference in wages results from (a) the number of hours worked, and (b) the choices in careers where women tend to choose lower paying industries and jobs and men tend to choose more difficult and dangerous jobs that tend to be higher paying. That kind of thing.

What's that got to do with your mockery of the concept of gender fluidity?[/quote]

It was addressing the accusation that I "sneer at those having contradictory views," and not merely or exclusively those with contradictory views about gender fluidity. I gave a list of examples of contradictory views that deserve a healthy dose of mockery and sneering.

[Forty Two]

"Socialism with corporate approval", eh...

Pretend socialism maybe...

Socialism, in the sense of state ownership or control of the means of production, etc., is horrific. The socialist notion of "to each according to his need, and from each according to ability to give" is an absolute horrorshow. These are concepts and ideals that are an affront to human dignity.

Socialism as in "social democracy" where individual rights are to a large extent protected, there exists a reasonably vibrant free market, where the means of production is not generally owned by the state, but where there is a significant social safety net - that's not the same thing and is not socialism.

Socialism sucks royal butt with a straw. Social democracy and hybrid economies are not the same.

[Forty Two]

She has been having strange seizures and freezing.

No she hasn't. Perhaps in the mind of the loony right who desperately want to see jesus in their toast.

What's this?

What's happening when her secret service agent has to come up to her and assure her that we're still here -- keep talking -- a couple of times. Watch that exchange.


This one is from before she passed out at the 9/11 rally --

Something is weird with her.

[pErvinalia]

modern gender studies theory

What's what now?

Modern gender theory -- that which is studied in "Gender Studies" courses.

Gender is something we "identify" as and it is "fluid" so it can change over time, but whatever one identifies as at any given time, they want to say is determined for them, and they were "born this way."

What's with the quotes? Can you provide examples of a person who holds that gender is both "fluid" and something they were born as?

Here's one who says she was "assigned" female at birth, but is gender fluid. http://groupthink.kinja.com/i-am-genderfluid-1558789334

"born this way" and "assigned" a gender at birth are not the same thing. So can you provide examples of a person who holds that gender is both "fluid" and something they were born as?

For me, it means that sometimes I am a woman, sometimes I am a man, and sometimes I am androgynous. I do not mean that sometimes I feel manly; in every internal sense, I am a man in those moments. My partner noticed that I hold myself differently, walk differently, speak differently, even interact with people differently depending on my gender identification. This isn't the same as being transgender, as I do not feel that I am always one gender. There are many times where I experience very acute gender dysphoria (female pronouns, looking very female, etc. when I am male or androgynous), but, when I am female, I don't. Genderfluidity is often included under the banner of genderqueer, which includes most non-binary gender identities. (The purple, white, and green colors are the genderqueer flag!)

Somehow, these folks can tell the difference between "feeling" like a man, and actually "being" a man in "every internal sense." This woman is claiming to "be" both man and woman depending on the time of day -- not just expressing certain actions or stereotypical appearances -- but actually changing between a man and a woman "internally."

What's that got to do with anything?

If you don't think any of this why do you keep banging on about it and sneering at those who express a contrary view?

Well, because issues are fun and interesting to discuss, for one thing. Issues of gender and sexuality are not sacrosanct. Religious people say stuff like that. If you don't believe in god, why do you keep arguing about whether he doesn't exist? Why do you keep banging on about god or religion if you don't believe any of it? Well, because (a) it's interesting, (b) it's philosophical, (c) it effects our culture, law and daily life and therefore every citizen has a right to discuss the issues. That kind of thing -- same for the gender issues.

Sneering at those who express a contrary view? Like discussions with religious folks, it's really very hard to get someone in that camp to focus and present exactly what their view is in any coherent form. It's all very mushy. But, much my "sneering" (I'd suggest comical mockery and light ridicule, but if you prefer sneering as a term, fine), involves discussions where something from the progressive, identity politics camp is said that appears self-contradictory and strange. Like when some SJW person argues that wearing a Trump hat is "hate speech," and that "all white people are racist, all cisgendered people are transphobic, all straight people are homophobic....", or when they claim to be interested in equality but actively protest funding for a men's mental health center, or when they claim to be for free speech, but they disrupt peaceful conferences being held in college classrooms and pull fire alarms or commandeer stages and threaten speakers....or when a professor calls for "muscle" to get a student reporter off of public property because she didn't want a rally filmed and reported on, or when Yale identity politics weirdos accost a professor because the professor's wife said that adults in college don't need someone telling them what Halloween costumes to wear....or when they bleat on about women being discriminated against in universities when women make up 60% of the students, 60% of the graduates, and receive more financial aid and campus support programs than men....when when they bleat on about "wage gaps" when almost all of any identified difference in wages results from (a) the number of hours worked, and (b) the choices in careers where women tend to choose lower paying industries and jobs and men tend to choose more difficult and dangerous jobs that tend to be higher paying. That kind of thing.

What's that got to do with your mockery of the concept of gender fluidity?

It was addressing the accusation that I "sneer at those having contradictory views," and not merely or exclusively those with contradictory views about gender fluidity. I gave a list of examples of contradictory views that deserve a healthy dose of mockery and sneering.

Brian was talking about gender fluidity.

[pErvinalia]

She has been having strange seizures and freezing.

No she hasn't. Perhaps in the mind of the loony right who desperately want to see jesus in their toast.

What's this?

What's happening when her secret service agent has to come up to her and assure her that we're still here -- keep talking -- a couple of times. Watch that exchange.

I've already watched that multiple times. She's aware that something has gone wrong in the crowd, but doesn't know what it is. The SS guy is just reassuring her that the threat has been dealt with and to continue on. Jesus on toast!

This one is from before she passed out at the 9/11 rally --

Something is weird with her.

That's some sad arse shit. You right wing guys are desperate beyond belief. The head wobble thing is a common disarming behaviour when you are assaulted with multiple voices competing for your attention. I've done it, heaps of my friends have done it. This shit is laughably sad.

Edit: sorry, missed the last video. I didn't watch it all as it just seemed to be repeating the same thing over and over. But that was clearly a medical problem of some sort.

[Forty Two]

modern gender studies theory

What's what now?

Modern gender theory -- that which is studied in "Gender Studies" courses.

Gender is something we "identify" as and it is "fluid" so it can change over time, but whatever one identifies as at any given time, they want to say is determined for them, and they were "born this way."

What's with the quotes? Can you provide examples of a person who holds that gender is both "fluid" and something they were born as?

Here's one who says she was "assigned" female at birth, but is gender fluid. http://groupthink.kinja.com/i-am-genderfluid-1558789334

"born this way" and "assigned" a gender at birth are not the same thing. So can you provide examples of a person who holds that gender is both "fluid" and something they were born as?

What she's saying is that she was "assigned" the female gender because of her bits, but she was really born "gender fluid." These folks don't claim to be choosing their gender. They're claiming this is who they are, not what they opt for in life.

For me, it means that sometimes I am a woman, sometimes I am a man, and sometimes I am androgynous. I do not mean that sometimes I feel manly; in every internal sense, I am a man in those moments. My partner noticed that I hold myself differently, walk differently, speak differently, even interact with people differently depending on my gender identification. This isn't the same as being transgender, as I do not feel that I am always one gender. There are many times where I experience very acute gender dysphoria (female pronouns, looking very female, etc. when I am male or androgynous), but, when I am female, I don't. Genderfluidity is often included under the banner of genderqueer, which includes most non-binary gender identities. (The purple, white, and green colors are the genderqueer flag!)

Somehow, these folks can tell the difference between "feeling" like a man, and actually "being" a man in "every internal sense." This woman is claiming to "be" both man and woman depending on the time of day -- not just expressing certain actions or stereotypical appearances -- but actually changing between a man and a woman "internally."

What's that got to do with anything?

She's saying she's gender fluid in the same way that a CIS male is a man. That's the way they were made.

If you don't think any of this why do you keep banging on about it and sneering at those who express a contrary view?

Well, because issues are fun and interesting to discuss, for one thing. Issues of gender and sexuality are not sacrosanct. Religious people say stuff like that. If you don't believe in god, why do you keep arguing about whether he doesn't exist? Why do you keep banging on about god or religion if you don't believe any of it? Well, because (a) it's interesting, (b) it's philosophical, (c) it effects our culture, law and daily life and therefore every citizen has a right to discuss the issues. That kind of thing -- same for the gender issues.

Sneering at those who express a contrary view? Like discussions with religious folks, it's really very hard to get someone in that camp to focus and present exactly what their view is in any coherent form. It's all very mushy. But, much my "sneering" (I'd suggest comical mockery and light ridicule, but if you prefer sneering as a term, fine), involves discussions where something from the progressive, identity politics camp is said that appears self-contradictory and strange. Like when some SJW person argues that wearing a Trump hat is "hate speech," and that "all white people are racist, all cisgendered people are transphobic, all straight people are homophobic....", or when they claim to be interested in equality but actively protest funding for a men's mental health center, or when they claim to be for free speech, but they disrupt peaceful conferences being held in college classrooms and pull fire alarms or commandeer stages and threaten speakers....or when a professor calls for "muscle" to get a student reporter off of public property because she didn't want a rally filmed and reported on, or when Yale identity politics weirdos accost a professor because the professor's wife said that adults in college don't need someone telling them what Halloween costumes to wear....or when they bleat on about women being discriminated against in universities when women make up 60% of the students, 60% of the graduates, and receive more financial aid and campus support programs than men....when when they bleat on about "wage gaps" when almost all of any identified difference in wages results from (a) the number of hours worked, and (b) the choices in careers where women tend to choose lower paying industries and jobs and men tend to choose more difficult and dangerous jobs that tend to be higher paying. That kind of thing.

What's that got to do with your mockery of the concept of gender fluidity?

It was addressing the accusation that I "sneer at those having contradictory views," and not merely or exclusively those with contradictory views about gender fluidity. I gave a list of examples of contradictory views that deserve a healthy dose of mockery and sneering.

Brian was talking about gender fluidity.

Fuck off. He was talking about sneering at those with contradictory views and also was talking about gender fluidity. This wasn't even your conversation, so fuck off with your declarations about what the conversation was about.

[Feck]

"Socialism with corporate approval", eh...

Pretend socialism maybe...

Socialism, in the sense of state ownership or control of the means of production, etc., is horrific. The socialist notion of "to each according to his need, and from each according to ability to give" is an absolute horrorshow. These are concepts and ideals that are an affront to human dignity.

Socialism as in "social democracy" where individual rights are to a large extent protected, there exists a reasonably vibrant free market, where the means of production is not generally owned by the state, but where there is a significant social safety net - that's not the same thing and is not socialism.

Socialism sucks royal butt with a straw. Social democracy and hybrid economies are not the same.

I like how you have redefined socialism to state it is State Ownership rather than Social Ownership. Everything you say after that lie is utter bollocks you poisoned your own ,very fucking shallow, well .

[Forty Two]

"Socialism with corporate approval", eh...

Pretend socialism maybe...

Socialism, in the sense of state ownership or control of the means of production, etc., is horrific. The socialist notion of "to each according to his need, and from each according to ability to give" is an absolute horrorshow. These are concepts and ideals that are an affront to human dignity.

Socialism as in "social democracy" where individual rights are to a large extent protected, there exists a reasonably vibrant free market, where the means of production is not generally owned by the state, but where there is a significant social safety net - that's not the same thing and is not socialism.

Socialism sucks royal butt with a straw. Social democracy and hybrid economies are not the same.

I like how you have redefined socialism to state it is State Ownership rather than Social Ownership. Everything you say after that lie is utter bollocks you poisoned your own ,very fucking shallow, well .

Certainly one way to put is is to say that socialism advocates ownership of the means of production by the "community as a whole." I have no quarrel with that. However, the community as a whole doesn't act as one. The community as a whole can only (in the real world) act through a surrogate, which is some form of state or government structure. If you have ever seen an example of the means of production being owned by the community without there being a state or government structure, feel free to present it.

Nothing I said was a lie. The foundational concepts of socialism are awful and are not protective of individual rights.