***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Air Champa]

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Is simplifying respect what someone asks you to call them belittling? Seriously asking to learn for myself

Well it's not simply respect. if someone is suffering from gender dysphoria, a condition that carries a lot of real suffering and harm.

Would it be acceptable for me to miss gender them if I don't respect them?
I don't "repect" Caitlyn Jenner, would it be acceptable for me to misgender her? Id think not.

I won't comply with all nicknames, and the bar for me to comply is way lower than that of a trans person.

I would argue it's unethical to not comply with a trans persons pronouns if they are suffering from gender dysphoria.
If I don't respect a trans person I would still comply with their pronouns. in way that I might not for a nickname or some who identifies as "non-binary"


this makes it pretty materially different than a "nickname"

 

[boxer15]

This is one of those common retorts that if you think about it for a sec is actually transphobic.



Comparing a trans person desire to be known as the pronouns of the opposite sex to something as trivial as a nickname is pretty belittling.

Perhaps it’s implying Haley identifies solely as white and is transracial instead of biracial?

 

[Brownstone]

The same thing that every country that offers low-cost education does: have state/federal governments subsidize it. There's no magic to it, and that's what these USA used to do before Reagan. The higher taxes that used to be levied on the wealthiest corporations and individuals were reinvested in human capital*

*mostly white human capital (let's be honest)

College may be a choice, but it's not the one-way road to profit that many folks portray it as. Kids take advantage of the educational resources college offers in order to turn into income-producing citizens who will keep the country running and thriving. I disagree with the notion that it is, or should be a gamble. It is a continuous investment in the future stability of the country. Can you imagine what would happen to the electric grid (and the economy) if one day, there aren't enough engineers and technicians to prevent and address its failures immediately?

Companies started hurting for labor as soon as Covid shut down the human capital pipeline into the US and exposed that American resilience in light of poor K-12 education, poor early childhood policies, and poor fertility rates boils down to its ability to attract people who already have degrees and/or experience and are willing to work here legally or otherwise.

Companies that deal with work that requires a university-level knowledge base are having a lot of trouble finding employees because less folks are entering college due to the cost. And in a lot of these fields, employees get older, and a lot of them retire and take important institutional knowledge with them before they can transfer it to enough new people so that things keep running.
Safe infrastructure doesn't get built and maintained with a K-12 education. An effective medical body doesn't get built with K-12. Even tradespeople need to understand the concepts behind the things they put together, and that is not happening when they can barely read at fifth grade level. Blueprints are not written at 5th grade level. Higher education is not a luxury; it's a need.

While I agree that K-12 is foundational to the U.S. both in spirit and in practicality, I believe everything after should be the individuals or the employers responsibility. You mean the other countries that are homogenous and have people dying to come here for higher pay?

I think we agree on most things including that loan forgiveness does nothing to curb prices which is the reason for the issue

While we can do multivariate analysis on all these scenarios of not replacing important jobs I think that is a separate issue from James who went to Missouri State and got an Econ degree and can't get a job that can pay off his student loans and therefore needs a bailout. That's on James, not on me.

 

[dacomeup]

Well it's not simply respect. if someone is suffering from gender dysphoria, a condition that carries a lot of real suffering and harm.

Would it be acceptable for me to miss gender them if I don't respect them?
I don't "repect" Caitlyn Jenner, would it be acceptable for me to misgender her? Id think not.

I won't comply with all nicknames, and the bar for me to comply is way lower than that of a trans person.

I would argue it's unethical to not comply with a trans persons pronouns if they are suffering from gender dysphoria.
If I don't respect a trans person I would still comply with their pronouns. in way that I might not for a nickname or some who identifies as "non-binary"


this makes it pretty materially different than a "nickname"

But I don’t think that Haley’s is a “nickname” either. It’s a preferred name. When you fill out a job application, I’ve typically seen employers asking for both preferred names and pronouns as of late. That’s why the parallel makes sense and doesn’t seem belittling IMO. It was made to show how easy it is to offer/demonstrate to others basic respect and decency based on what they’ve expressed as their personal preferences.

Don’t think that I’m asserting that it’s ok to misgender if you don’t respect the person.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Don’t think that I’m asserting that it’s ok to misgender if you don’t respect the person.

maybe im misunderstanding, if complying with preferred names is a matter of respect
why can't I stop complying if I don't respect them?

seems like this happens all the time, if some demands to be called a nickname that we think is unreasonable,
I think most people would say it's acceptable to not comply

 

[fluid hips]

Here’s a small problem. As us millennials are slowly turning 40 many are turning from former Obama supporters that helped elect him both times to slowly turning into republicans. This needs to slow down but people get jaded as they get older unfortunately .

People generally become conservative when they start owning/accumulating things as they get older

 

[storm2006]

Here’s a small problem. As us millennials are slowly turning 40 many are turning from former Obama supporters that helped elect him both times to slowly turning into republicans. This needs to slow down but people get jaded as they get older unfortunately .

People generally become conservative when they start owning/accumulating things as they get older

Out of curiosity, do you guys mean conservative in terms of all political beliefs or in terms of fiscal policy (because they started owning/accumulating things)?

 

[balldontlie206]

But what happens if you’re old and still can’t afford anything? You still trend conservative?

 

[RustyShackleford]

The getting conservative as you get older is a macro phenomena, not a micro one. It is not true of everyone.

So when you track age cohort through time, they tend to vote more conservative the older they get.

Also, being conservative or liberal is relative to the time person. A progressive of the early 2000s would be consider center left or centrist today. The issues that drew a lot of people to one side or the other probably aren't driving in either direction 20 years later.

The thing is millennials started out firmly liberal, and younger liberal even more so that older ones. Gen Z even more.

So yeah, has cohorts age, they on aggregate appear to become more conservative. But as a whole millennials entered adulthood so firmly left than even with the aging shift they will still be on the left.

And of course people we be more "conservative" relative to the population as they get older because younger generations are more progressive.

 

[RustyShackleford]

But also, owning a house seems to turn most people into NIMBY *******s.

 

[dacomeup]

maybe im misunderstanding, if complying with preferred names is a matter of respect
why can't I stop complying if I don't respect them?

seems like this happens all the time, if some demands to be called a nickname that we think is unreasonable,
I think most people would say it's acceptable to not comply

You’re conflating preferred names with nicknames. I have a friend named Christian who goes by Michael, which is his middle name. That’s his preferred name. Respecting what he prefers to be called, I call him Michael. Calling him Christian would obviously show that I don’t respect him/ his wishes given that he’s expressed to me and others that Michael is his preferred name. That’s why I think the parallels make sense, and don’t think that it’s belittling. Both are examples of respecting people’s individual preferences.

If someone has an inappropriate or unreasonable nickname, that’s kind of irrelevant to both of these examples and outside of the scope of what the parallel attempts to show IMO.

 

[storm2006]

But also, owning a house seems to turn most people into NIMBY *******s.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

You’re conflating preferred names with nicknames. I have a friend named Christian who goes by Michael, which is his middle name. That’s his preferred name. Respecting what he prefers to be called, I call him Michael. Calling him Christian would obviously show that I don’t respect him/ his wishes given that he’s expressed to me and others that Michael is his preferred name. That’s why I think the parallels make sense, and don’t think that it’s belittling. Both are examples of respecting people’s individual preferences.

If someone has an inappropriate or unreasonable nickname, that’s kind of irrelevant to both of these examples and outside of the scope of what the parallel attempts to show IMO.

1. With a preferred name is not based simply on "preference" there is an underlying fact of the matter, Mike IS short for Michael, your middle name is in fact X.
by this logic isn't it perfectly acceptable to misgender a trans person? it's not up to the individual preference what the common contractions of their name is.

2. Let's say Michael Malone does something I find distasteful and I lose all respect for him
I think it's totally reasonable if I stop complying with his request to be called "Michael" and I call him "Mike"
If someone called OJ Orenthall, I don't think we'd find it distasteful or objectionable, to withdraw the deference to OJ's preference.

Trans is such a fundamentally unique thing, i don't think the comparison to nicknames or preferred names works at all.



I think the reason we respect the pronouns, regardless of your level of respect, or how you feel about the person, is the potential for harm.
seems to me anything less kind of trivializes it.

but thats just my opinion.

 

[dacomeup]

1. With a preferred name is not based simply on "preference" there is an underlying fact of the matter, Mike IS short for Michael, your middle name is in fact X.
by this logic isn't it perfectly acceptable to misgender a trans person? it's not up to the individual preference what the common contractions of their name is.

I don’t think it’s acceptable to misgender someone or call someone by a name that they don’t want you to call them by. I think you’re seeing the end that you want to get to and trying to adjust the explanation to get to that.

2. Let's say Michael Malone does something I find distasteful and I lose all respect for him
I think it's totally reasonable if I stop complying with his request to be called "Michael" and I call him "Mike"
If someone called OJ Orenthall, I don't think we'd find it distasteful or objectionable, to withdraw the deference to OJ's preference

Again, I don’t think it’s reasonable to speak to a person and call them a name that they don’t prefer to be called. But that’s just me. I’m not referring to internet jokes here. If OJ expresses the desire to be called OJ, then I don’t thinks it’s reasonable to call him by a different name. For example, yt people often try to shorten my full name in professional spaces, it would still be unreasonable, distasteful and objectionable to not comply with my request to call me by my full name even if I do something distasteful. That sounds silly to me.

I think the reason we respect the pronouns, regardless of your level of respect, or how you feel about the person, is the potential for harm.
seems to me anything less kind of trivializes it.

Yea, I don’t think this is an absolute. I think both things can be true. A lot of people will not comply with the whichever pronouns an individual requests to be called because they don’t have respect for trans people/trans rights AND as a result it causes harm. I think you’re trying to make this an either or unnecessarily to get to the conclusion that you think is right here.

 

[dwalk31]

Again, I don’t think it’s reasonable to speak to a person and call them a name that they don’t prefer to be called. But that’s just me.

I do not prefer to be called Delk, even on here.

 

[Comparison Ford]

Bold of you to assume that you’re a person.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I do not prefer to be called Delk, even on here.

Shut up, Delk

 

[Mark Antony]

What you mean "even on here"? They call you that out there? Damn Delk was son's real name this whole time?

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I don’t think it’s acceptable to misgender someone or call someone by a name that they don’t want you to call them by. I think you’re seeing the end that you want to get to and trying to adjust the explanation to get to that.

Well no I don't think you believe that.

this brings us back to the nicknames, if someone wants to be called a nickname that is unreasonable, I'm guessing you wouldn't just defer to their preferences.

It seems to me you drawn a pretty arbitrary line around "prefered name" vs "nickname" what makes one acceptable to not comply with vs the other.

It seems to me it's the underlying fact that their name is that name and it is in fact short for X.

A pronoun is not like that, they are actually not the same sex as the corresponding pronoun. So by this logic, it IS similar to a nickname and it is totally reasonable to not comply.

expand...Again, I don’t think it’s reasonable to speak to a person and call them a name that they don’t prefer to be called. But that’s just me. I’m not referring to internet jokes here. If OJ expresses the desire to be called OJ, then I don’t thinks it’s reasonable to call him by a different name. For example, yt people often try to shorten my full name in professional spaces, it would still be unreasonable, distasteful and objectionable to not comply with my request to call me by my full name even if I do something distasteful. That sounds silly to me.

I admire your valor. If I do something as a courtesy I have the right revoke it. It is reasonable to shake someone's hand when you meet them,

I don't think it's unreasonable to revoke that courtesy if certain conditions are met.

And even internet jokes, I think not calling someone by a preferred name is an acceptable joke, I don't youd accept misgendering someone as acceptable internet joke

I think you’re trying to make this an either or unnecessarily to get to the conclusion that you think is right here.

I think you've drawn pretty arbitrary distinctions around prefered names vs nick names to get to the conclusion you think is right here.

 

[WASPS ANDD ASPS]

Phub is now blocked in Virginia

 

[dacomeup]

I do not prefer to be called Delk, even on here.

Troll pls

 

[Wargames]

Like I been saying for years now we have a radical Republican court and they need to be treated as hostile to everyone

 

[Wargames]

Troll pls

**** that guy put him on ignore

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Troll pls

Would you be comfortable misgendering a trans person on the internet, provided their internet sneaker forum posts were of low quality?