iNow

This is a big question. It’s in the US Congress especially the House, but more so it’s something tens of millions of voters seem to actually want and desire… though they’d never admit and maybe even aren’t self-aware enough to acknowledge this is how they feel. It’s coming through with how they vote, and how they support specific candidates with these tendencies, and how they attack anyone who votes differently than them online and IRL… complete with making death threats to those who voted to improve infrastructure. It’s happening at school board meetings and in neighborhoods and on apps like Nextdoor where neighbors are supposed to be posting about lemonade stands and selling raffle tickets. We see it in voting restrictions across the states and in the way they’re redrawing voting maps with redistricting and gerrymandering at the heart. We see it more formally in statehouses, yes, and in local legislatures, but these authoritarian / strong man / “be damned with the law so long as we have more power than the other team” mindsets are everywhere and spreading. It’s hard to summarize my point in a simple post, but I keep thinking how Hitler came to office via popular election, too. People voted for him, and the US feels more and more like that, too.

Especially, but not only, there. Yes.

I appreciate and applaud your optimism, but can’t get onboard with your verb being in the last tense there

It’s a matter of precision and accurate framing. We don’t “have evidence to support” that death is the end. It’s the most likely valid explanation, site, but we don’t have evidence FOR it so much as we absolutely lack ANY evidence whatsoever despite thousands of years of seeking that death is NOT the end… that ANYTHING at all happens or persists in any meaningful way once our biological functions cease. Perhaps a bit pedantic, but is more precise. Similarly, we don’t have evidence that flying unicorns don’t exist, we just lack evidence that they really do exist in anything more than fantasy books and children's imaginations.

In context of this thread, not social backlash more broadly. For the sake of argument, I was simply saying… “Fine. The professors loss of job is now relevant. Okay. We’ll go with that. I don’t really think it is, but whatever. It’s still just ONE and not thousands of people losing their job over pronoun problems.” I was NOT arguing that social backlash doesn’t happen. Is this clear now, or shall I repeat myself 17 more times over the next 10 pages of thread before we can move to the next point?

I should add… MULTIPLE others have pointed out these same things, often in more detail and with more rigor than I did. I framed the above as I did since so many replies have focused on targeting me personally. I’m reminded of an old saying in politics: When the law is on your side, pound the law. When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If neither the facts or law are on your side, pound the table… or on the character and integrity of me as iNow, in this case.

I’m not the one who claimed people are being thrown in jail for using the wrong pronouns. I’m not the one who failed to provide even a single example of this actually happening. I’m not the one who keeps misrepresenting this law despite repeated correction. I’m not the one who claimed people are being involuntarily terminated from their jobs for using the wrong pronouns. I’m not the one who claimed a lesbian professor was involuntarily terminated for her lack of respectful pronoun use. I’m not the one who introduced this professor into the discussion when asked to provide even a single example of someone actually getting fired. I’m not the one who kept claiming she was involuntarily terminated for her views even after being repeatedly corrected that she resigned. She quit. I AM the one who suggested that this example was irrelevant to our discussion. I AM the one who said this example wasn’t of equivalent scale to the issues being faced by the trans community even if it was somehow conceded as relevant. I AM the one who CORRECTLY framed her situation as resigning voluntarily as a result of the social backlash she faced for sticking her foot into her mouth. And now… I am the one saying that providing EVEN MORE examples of people facing social backlash on college campuses (not facing jail, not facing termination from employment, just some not positive social feedback for their approach to OTHER issues which aren’t even tangentially related to trans pronouns) has fuck all to do with this conversation. I hope this clarifies, and eagerly await on the edge of my seat with bated breath seeing how you will mischaracterize your next set of examples and where the goalposts get moved to next time.

Indeed. It’s like those Republicans who voted to impeach Trump are being cancelled. And now this week those republicans who voted for historically bipartisan infrastructure are being cancelled. They’re also getting threats of having their lives cancelled for voting in the affirmative. Death threats. The ultimate cancel culture.

Yes. You’re, of course, correct. The last 32 pages of thread have been focused laser tight on what people think of Jordan Petersons views and NOBODY has been misrepresenting a law, saying people would go to jail for using wrong pronouns, and that people are losing jobs en masse despite a dearth of examples… nope. Totally correct. That conversation never happened. /sarcasm

Which makes them worth F-all / exactly zero in this particular thread then, wouldn’t you say? Also, why are you conflating “social backlash” with “termination” and jail?

Of course it is, and the plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not evidence. Worse, in this thread we don’t even have plural anecdotes. We have ONE… one that is only tenuously… sorta kinda somewhat if you squint real hard and tilt your head sideways like a confused dog… connected. It’s an example of a professor one time somewhere in one place once resigning due to social backlash when she stuck her foot in her mouth. So, we’re left wondering… where are all of these examples of cultural repression and retaliation that’s been so passionately decried and detested throughout this thread? The examples given have all this far been unrelated garbage red herrings stacked like Jenga blocks on top of strawmanesque misrepresentations of a law.

To be clear, I very much can and do. I’m primarily pushing back on the actual root cause and scale. You gave one single anecdote of one single person just one single time being held accountable for their speech and actions, and I’m pushing back on the consistently false claim that they were fired. They were not. They resigned, and that remains true even if I stipulate that social pressures likely motivated that choice. Sadly, it keeps getting presented as something it’s not. They were NOT fired. They were NOT victimized by the law underlying this entire discussion. I and others here, however, are speaking of millions upon millions of people globally who every single day of their lives for decades upon decades are being targeted for violence and discrimination more broadly simply for being themselves… for expressing who they are authentically in public… for asking to be called Janet instead of James. I’m pushing back on this ridiculous suggestion of equivalence between the two. The equivalence being asserted is plainly false, especially since you keep misrepresenting your counter example as being something it actually is not.

You’re willing to accept that I am wrong and biased? Wow, how magnanimous of you. 😂 Whatever. Good luck with that.

I’m perfectly willing to be convinced that I am wrong or mistaken. I am always open to the idea that maybe I’m being inconsistent and even unfair. I will readily acknowledge fault and error when it’s highlighted for me. Posts like this one from you, however, will lead to none of those outcomes. Posts like this serve only to further deteriorate my already limited and continuously eroded respect for you. Posts like this cause me only to reinforce my view of you as a childish poster seemingly incapable of making cogent coherent points without resorting to personal barbs and emotional outbursts. Did your favorite lesbian professor quit or was she fired? Nothing I said was inaccurate. Let’s start there, perhaps. What about me saying this objectively true statement led you to call me blind, biased, and hypocritical, because I do not think those words mean what you think they mean. Like, within the last 2 hours, or just today? Maybe you mean how many have I done since last week? Please clarify.

Also, nobody’s gone to court. Nobody’s lost rights. Nobody’s lost jobs. The lesbian example to which Koti keeps clinging was a resignation, not a firing. Still arguing against the fantasies of those with the audacity to call others delusional. Ho hum.

We've been through this. Several times, in fact. I was not inferring transphobia. I was inferring you might have blind spots... spots to which you maybe were... blind. Have you considered their perspective and how exhausting it is to live every single day of your entire life not being accepted for who you are, being targeted for violence, and needing to constantly defend yourself against the perceptual whims of others? Y'all keep telling me I can't see your perspective, and that's bullshit. I'm amplifying the perspective of those who are impacted most by this issue. I promise it's not the cis-gendered white males who are being asked to stop calling someone Janet when they refer to themselves as James. You've also acknowledged your own willingness to respect this, so it's unclear to me why you keep suggesting this deep disagreement between us.

Super. Now, as for that relevance part…

Not that anybody is counting, but I believe this is now the 4th time you’ve done this dying swan routine just in this one thread. One more and you get a free sandwich!

I've considered this rather deeply actually, and repeatedly come to the decision that in this case it's rather clearly not. The fact that I strongly disagree with them and find them lacking / deserving of robust counter argument does NOT mean I haven't examined, considered, or don't understand them. Where did I do this exactly? I mean, I probably have, but don't recall and wonder if you may be conflating me with others. We've been through this repeatedly. Nobody is removing that right from you. You're arguing against men of straw. It's not hard to do, either. There are many such points. It seems we agree, and the evidence very much supports this conclusion.

I very much do, which is part of why this conversation matters so much to me

To me, being held accountable for actions is generally good. We have social norms, which sometimes need to evolve, but which get enforced through ostracizism and negative feedback. I also feel that too often those lamenting cancel cultures the modest tend to be the ones seeking most often to cancel other cultures, but this may just be my own confirmation bias at work. The bigger problems I see are tribalism and mob justice. Cancel culture as a catch-all phrase just happens to be one of the stronger lenses these days through which we hear about those aforementioned problems of tribalism and mob mentalities on social platforms… a type of piling on and bandwagon effect.

I find myself wondering if you have ever been formally diagnosed with reading comprehension problems

Thank you for finally focusing on the REAL problem… reminding us all to ignore the pursuit of respect and acceptance for transgender pronouns and to instead direct our energies toward the REAL victims in all of this… those poor souls who refuse that acceptance and respect of pronouns and force transgenders individuals into inaccurate binary buckets. You’re a hero sir for standing up so passionately for them. Who here doesn’t believe the story Chappelle shared? I seem to have missed that part of this thread and would appreciate a quote or retraction.

It’s less common, but is out there. It’s called hard atheism as Segev said.