iNow

I’ll take progress where I can get it. After all… At least this time he’s not sexually assaulting his students and fondling nonconsenting women at conferences. 🙄 Fascinating. I hadn’t realized that white males were a protected class suffering from a long history of discrimination and brutal violence due solely to their gender identification.

I do like how everyone has started chasing the fresh new squirrel Koti has thrown into the mix… in what appears to be a banal attempt to distract us all from his profound failure to adequately defend his previous views and stances on the Peterson and trans pronouns issues… Quick!! Look over there!!! They took down white photos! Ho hum. Yawn.

It's called humor, and the funniest jokes as we all know are those we must later explain. Must. Resist. Urge... to tell you... to also stop being so... Sensitive

Nonsense. They're just trolling. Have been for a while

Indeed and agreed. My basic thinking, however, is that at some time AFTER that test one might encounter someone infected, increase their viral load, and pass it on to others without knowing. In essence, my original comment was you're ALWAYS able to pass the virus to others even when you've bene previously infected or fully vaccinated, so bear that in mind when thinking through these issues. It's not like you're impenetrable after 10 days, for example.

More like even when their immune system is able to dispatch it, this cleaning process takes time. Much like being immunized... helps afford protection, but isn't some 100% shield. Walk into an ER... even vaccinated or recovered from infection... you'll pick up virus. Then walk into a grocery store after and you can infect someone else.

Agree completely, but in this case one wonders why others felt it relevant to even mention in a thread like this... as if they were searching for rationalizations for their views, perhaps? And here I thought this thread was in the Politics forum. Kidding aside, if you feel you've been taken out of context, then correct me and point that out. I'm here arguing in good faith. I have a LONG history of doing so too, even if you don't happen to appreciate the rhetorical weapons I wield nor how I use them to make my case / erode the case of those who happen to disagree. Once more, you're reading into my words comments and meanings I don't intend. I am not asserting nor assuming any such thing about you (see also: my comments about potential blindspots). Stop being so sensitive. Lol

Yeah, that's a very common and useful trick... mixing CA glue with sanding dust. Great filler that tends to always match the material in that area. Same can be done with standard wood glue and sanding dust, in fact. Biggest issue of concern is it won't always take stain the same way as the surrounding area and sometimes looks different when finished with oils or polys, etc. If you do use the CA glue method, you can really speed things up with a quick spray of accelerator after the sanding. There's also a product from a company called Starbond where it's colored CA glue and comes in black and brown... which is really handy for filling small cracks and gaps like this.

Technically, a person can always transmit and shed virus regardless of when they were last infected

No worries, bud. We’re good ✌️

Perhaps you can’t agree with it because that’s very clearly NOT a valid representation of my conclusion.

It has been shown to be false, even though you remain obstinate and stubbornly and personally incredulous regarding why.

Thought I'd already clarified this about 7 or 29 or 498 times, but just to share once more: The claim is that the belief in god must be put aside when doing science, and anywhere it continues to be included (other than personal motivations) means that science is not being conducted properly. I'm sorry my flippant use of the word "pretend" in that brief post has led to such continued confusion and outcry... something about which I've also already apologized.

And to clarify, I wasn’t suggesting that you had. I was suggesting that others had, and you replied without ever even questioning the assertion. You accepted the premise that delusion explains why some transgendered individuals identify with the gender they do and responded accordingly by calling everyone else too sensitive or too PC. Questioning the premise is the correct first step in these discussions. Is delusion a valid description for why the majority of trans individuals identify how they do? Absolutely not, and it seems you agree, but that wasn’t clear when your response implicitly accepted the false premise.

Correct. Convince me of it’s relevance to the actual discussion and first clearly define your terms then perhaps I’ll reconsider. Please clarify. In this discussion about trans individuals asking others to respect their gender identity, who are you saying is delusional?

Is that what you think happened here? One person requested JP call them Ze and he went out on a speaking tour to express how his rights were being taken away… and all this happened when what he REALLY desperately wanted to do (full of sincerity and goodness) was to have a respectful discussion about the meaning of Ze and to better understand why this person identified that way. But, NO!! Those horrible people looking for acceptance and inclusion chose instead to call him a transphobe and that was it!! It was over at that moment. All of his warmth and goodness and desire to proceed forward in the spirit of mutual understanding (and NOT earn buckets of speaking fees and sell tens of millions of books with divisive tribal politics) was rebuffed and spat upon!! That’s the point you’re making to me right now?

I agreed with the answer Peterkin already gave. Ask the person requesting you call them that. Have a respectful discussion. Problem solved.

You’re not the only participant here nor are you alone representative of what’s happening across society. It’s not all about you, brother. Thou dost protest too much IMO Probably, “why are you asking me? I’m your proctologist, now bend over.”

Who suggested it was crossing a line to request they refer to transgendered individuals by their stated gender instead of their assigned one when they “don’t even know if they’re just delusional?” Is that a serious question? You were the first to introduce the possibility here: Then when @Arete asked you what harm it does to accept someone else’s stated gender identity even if you think it’s a delusion, you didn’t reject the premise and instead answered it as a valid description saying: Later when @TheVat suggested it was a matter of etiquette and morality to respect the request for using the chosen gender pronoun, and to do so even if one thinks it’s a delusion, both @Intoscience and @kotiagain accepted the premise and replied with suggestions that this was all about being PC and that those making the request are being ridiculous. Then once again you suggested explicitly that a number of trans individuals are likely just delusional and suffering mental health issues… saying some are just nutbars are how it’s simply fashionable these days to “appease” them here: We then had another poster come in with this same basic framing: …and continued with that framing in their next posts. Maybe my point has been made. Maybe you were just sloppy with your language, but let’s be clear… it’s not just an issue in this thread here at SFN. In the general public outside of SFN it’s very regularly suggested that being transgendered is a delusion. 23 seconds of googling gives about 50+ examples. Here are a handful: Quentin Van Meter, Germaine Greer, James Caspian, Rosi Sexton, and yes… many have summarized our very own Jordan Petersons view on trans individuals as suggesting they’re delusional for their gender identity expression. Representatives across US state legislatures… in churches around the globe… elsewhere and on and on… they’re doing it, too… during debates about making it illegal to use certain bathrooms or play certain sports… issues with which I know you’re familiar given our exchanges in the transgendered sports threads… judges like Matthew Kacsmaryk in the Northern District of Texas, or Representative John Ragan in Tennessee, or North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Rep. Mark Robinson, for example. And I won’t even mention Fox News media personalities… You asked me to name one. I’ve done that and more.

Uhm. It was directed at people who assert anyone assigned at birth as Gender A now identifying as Gender B is “delusional.” … exactly like I said the first time… in the bit you quoted. Speaking of honesty, how about you stop questioning mine, eh?

No, though if they truly ARE delusional, I remain unsure why calling them that to their face is supposed to be a good thing to do. It’s not courteous, not helpful, and majority of the time not relevant. I think about the gay marriage fights. Two people with similar genitalia and pee pee plumbing love each other and want to share their lives together. They want the same recognition, acceptance, and benefits as those with different genital plumbing. Then, someone says they’re “delusional” for loving and wanting to marry someone of the same sex. It makes zero sense. It’s borderline bigoted if not entirely so. Now apply that same thinking to folks who assert anyone assigned at birth as Gender A now identifying as Gender B is “delusional.” This isn’t about fear of hurt feelings. It’s about stopping the disrespect and dismissal of others simply because they don’t fit into our preconceived, rigid, and outdated notions of gender. It’s about inclusion and acceptance, (or at least halting being close minded asshats with no accountability).

People who wish to break said law grasping at straws / seeking justifications and rationalizations for continuance of their discriminatory behavior

Nor did I suggest otherwise, but this applies to the population as a whole and regardless of one’s expressed gender identity. Well… I’d agree with you, but then we’d BOTH be wrong. While nobody has claimed ALL trans individuals are simply delusional, the claim that MANY individuals expressing themselves as a gender contrary to the one they were assigned at birth may simply be delusional has been repeated many times and over and over again. So, either you’re not paying very close attention to the conversation, or you’re intentionally attacking a strawman of what I’m saying. Neither of those possibilities inclines me to take your specious criticisms very seriously.

Nope

Maybe bc I wasn’t trying to? Am I really failing this badly at communicating such a simple and straight forward point? Sigh… whatever. I have a valid point here, but it’s off topic anyway so cheers.