iNow

I might put a slight proviso on this… squabbling with folks in good faith and with whom I share mutual respect, absolutely. When it’s just a social media comments section with strangers and folks are there to score points and agitate others or argue using fallacies… or when this happens IRL at the grocery store, outside of the school, or in related other public spaces… not so much.

Wonder if it’s not so much the political squabbling itself that gets one down, but instead is the inability to unplug from it either in our digital lives or our in person lives since we’re always online every. Single. Day. Day after day. After day.

Don’t be so sure. This conclusion seems a bit premature.

I’m having a hard time seeing how this gets operationalized IRL if it actually happens. Military is the enforcement arm. They are the muscle behind the decision. If they’re onboard with a flawed decision, then who muscles them out? It’s gonna take more than a few conscientious dissenters and militia clubs with AR-15s to remove a leader being protected by the US military, IMO.

I reckon that depends quite a lot on which specific individuals each specific president happens to elevate into said “top brass,” or who is made the Attorney’s General, for example. It gets decided by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the most senior military leader under the president. That individual must give the forces below them the order to either remove the previous president from the office by force, or the command to protect them from anyone claiming to be the new president and attempting to take power / execute the transition. See also my previous comment about how and why it matters who gets selected for these roles.

He did. What saved us is that enough people refused to follow them. Sadly, the groundwork is being laid right now so it will be much easier next time. There are good ideas in the voting rights act being pushed through Congress right now which will directly help with the issues you cite, but it’s being steadfastly blocked by the GOP and will only pass if the filibuster is changed.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but anyone still dismissing trans individuals as delusional is themselves… delusional.

*weren’t

I’m ignorant of many things, including some parts of sociology. It’s been quite a few years since those few semesters when I took classes and performed experimentation in that area, but I suspect I’m not quite as ignorant as you imagine. Wait, I did what where now? I’m sure I have many illuminating things to contribute, but I found your post so full of offensive terms that I’ve chosen instead to illuminate that. I’m informed enough to know that terms negroid, mongoloid, and related others aren’t used by anyone who matters or is worth my time.

Have you considered using terminology that didn’t fall out of favor due to being ignorant and discriminatory well over 60 years ago?

So much for being thread relevant. Carry on

Another handy trick is to post something that’s actually relevant to the thread topic. You might try that next time instead of judging all these people you’re only just meeting for the very first time in a community with which you’re still only just beginning to become familiar.

Perhaps restate the question you feel is being ignored.

Apology accepted

Of course, and I don't believe anyone is suggesting we ought to go without counterargument. Sadly thus far, most "counterarguments" are limited to "stop whining" and "you're just being too sensitive." Those aren't counterarguments. They're disrespectful dismissals of valid reasonable requests. Right... and we should watch out for all 7 of those people ( )who have actual mental health issues while ALSO respecting the other 99.9% who simply asking for acceptance (not even acceptance, just an end to the dismissal, disparagement, and disrespect) for identifying as their authentic selves.

I believe the correct response would’ve been: define “love.”

We all do as a culture. Together. Right now, the push is for improved standards. The momentum is for additional inclusion and acceptance. The resistance is indeed shrinking and dying. We’re witnessing now their last thrashing gasps, but hopefully we can soon make this: … an unnecessary delay and needless obstacle. It’s time and we don’t need to wait. We can achieve the betterment now if we all stand up and fight for it even when we’re not personally affected. If we do, then this: … becomes a pointless nonsequitur since we’re ALL attempting to make things better. The issue won’t be that we’ve gone too far, but that we haven’t yet gone far enough. Progress… We can all… each and every one of us right now and today… attempt to be MORE correct… politically or otherwise. We can do this with our own thoughts and we can lead by example while in parallel advocating for change when interacting with others. No death of aging flatulentarions required.

I don't believe I have formed an opinion on your personality. Perhaps I have, but at least not consciously. I've been trying to focus on your actual words and what you're actually posting. In that case, the style with which you (and all of us) post is quite relevant... as is the style we use when reacting and responding to others who might happen to find our inaccurate choice of pronoun (even after repeated correction) offensive and irritating.

I've noticed this too, but am often on my mobile device and chalked it up to a recent software upgrade on iOS. Any chance that's how you're accessing?

And that's really all that's being requested here yet, for reasons which IMO don't need saying, MANY people find even that too onerous a burden. In my mind, it's the equivalent of refusing to stop calling someone the N-word or continuing to refer to people as retarded, and suggesting that people who request you do so are simply being too sensitive and ridiculous. They're not. They're on the receiving end of this and are being targeted by these words and subtle rejections every single day they exist... often for months, years, and decades at a time. It's not your place to tell others that these words aren't hurtful to them when misused, and it's not your place to continue hurting them through continued use or out of laziness or sheer refusal to move beyond historical tradition. Language evolves. Misuse of these words has fallen out of favor and their adjusted use now represents acceptable parlance in society for good reason. In much the same way you don't refer to a woman as sugar-tits, you no longer refer to a trans person who identifies as HE by calling them SHE... and thankfully those individuals who continue refusing to take the simple step of respecting pronouns of the trans community are ALSO falling out of favor culturally. You can either get onboard or get out of the way... you can either be a partner in improving society or attempt to stand in its way as an obstacle... but society will continue changing whether one likes it or not. Again here, the arrogance and lack of empathy is astonishing. Nobody is saying you can't or won't slip up... That's fine and WILL happen, but yet again here you dismiss acceptable, polite, and entirely valid requests to stop calling someone SALLY when they identify as JAMES with disparaging language like "whining" and suggesting it's no "big deal." Well, sure... Maybe it's no big deal for YOU, a cis-gendered male who's never had to battle daily slights and discrimination just for being who you are... but you're not the only person living in this world, nor are you the sole arbiter of what is considered important to millions of humans. This is about acceptance and authenticity. People are being shunned simply for being true to themselves. They are being targeted and ostracized, being brutalized and facing violence at unacceptable rates, and fighting daily battles against a culture who still too often treats them as subhuman. Maybe adjusting our own views and being just a bit more sensitive ourselves to their very real plight will help extinguish these disturbing trends.

Of course I can, but as you seem not to have reread the exchange as I earlier recommended, and as Markus has already clarified that it was he who made the claim at which you took umbrage, and also since Markus has already further elucidated his intended meaning when making said claim, it seems both moot and unnecessary for me to bother.

Please reread our exchange. You have misunderstood me.

Kindness is what prevented him from suggesting you’d hit your head and experienced trauma on the way down.

*god, not gif

God is often used as a way to explain things we don’t yet understand. The gif concept fills those gaps. However, as science and culture progress and we continue learning more, those gaps begin to shrink and eventually close, thus rendering the concept of God obsolete and unneeded.