LEFTISTS fear opposing views, a prime example is provided

[Argentbear]

Oh okay, so when they specifically asked "How did you conclude that she's a woman? Having a husband is not a sufficient reason." it had nothing to do with gender or LGBT. Great... by all means correct me and fill me in on the actual intent.

It's a legitimate question and and having a husband is not a sufficient reason.

I don't need to be psychic to pick up on what is written in plain English. It was a silly question that was designed to impugn my character, and it got a silly answer in return. If some people want to play 'What? Who, me? Noooo you got it all wrong", they can try it with someone else.

The only person negatively impacting your character is you.

Maybe if you would have actually answered the very simple question instead to being rude it might have led to an actual conversation.

 

[Eliana]

It's a legitimate question and and having a husband is not a sufficient reason.

Great, so my initial assessment was correct. Why are you mad again? (Rhetorical question)

The only person negatively impacting your character is you.

Maybe if you would have actually answered the very simple question instead to being rude it might have led to an actual conversation.

Finally, when even that failed, I clicked on her name and read her about profile like a normal human.

Oops.

Try reading everything next time.

 

[Heyo]

View attachment 95792

I hope so. We have come off the wrong foot. And this has escalated quickly. Let me ensure you that I had no malicious intent with my question. It isn't that long that mentioning one's husband doesn't automatically reveal one's gender. It is an honest logical error to think otherwise. It can happen to everyone, no indication of homophobia implied.

Peace?

 

[Secret Chief]

Maybe it's my posting style?

It's almost as if it didn't say "female" on your profile page/about.

 

[Argentbear]

Great, so my initial assessment was correct. Why are you mad again? (Rhetorical question)

I'm mad? News to me You giving your telepathic talents a rest or something?

 

[Eliana]

I'm mad? News to me You giving your telepathic talents a rest or something?

Man you're boring me now. Moving on.

 

[Argentbear]

Man you're boring me now. Moving on.

In the future I will try to be more entertaining for you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Oh yes, it's a real storm out after being asked the same question for 20+ pages, long after expressing my exhaustion with said question. Since being here I've delt with antisemites and blatant holocaust deniers, none of whom got any attention from hardly anyone. However the moment someone tries to make me out to be some kind of homophobe (I'm not, everyone is G-d's child) and here a bunch of you are for the pile up.

As I said, I don't have the patience for bad faith questions. Especially when they are designed to make me out as something I'm not.

I was very upfront about who I am and my personality and I treat people as good as they treat me. If some people don't like me, oh well, I couldn't care less. Regardless, I suggest people find a softer target to attack. I'm a Jewish woman, we love arguing.

View attachment 95792

The point is you're acting this way over a simple and fair question. It wasn't n attack on your character, there was no malicious intent, get over yourself.

 

[Eliana]

I hope so. We have come off the wrong foot. And this has escalated quickly. Let me ensure you that I had no malicious intent with my question. It isn't that long that mentioning one's husband doesn't automatically reveal one's gender. It is an honest logical error to think otherwise. It can happen to everyone, no indication of homophobia implied.

Peace?

Then what does "How did you conclude that she's a woman? Having a husband is not a sufficient reason." mean if it had nothing to do with gender or LGBT? Please explain the intent to my dumb brain, because I'd sure hate to misrepresent your intent.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I've been speaking about human nature in these forums for years, and although I consider myself a classic sort of liberal, I do not try to pretend that we can make humans give up their biases. I do not pretend that we don't, each in our way way, try to satisfy our own needs to the best of our ability -- and that we sometimes do so at the expense of others. We are not programmed like social insects -- or the Borg -- so that our own self-interest doesn't exist -- it does, and informs much that we do.

Yeah, but something with that has to change at some point, I think. Not to the point where we steadily give resources to the rich or more capable, or to the point where we it cede to those who behave in an overtly anti-social matter - though I do wonder how conditions can shape character. This might be why I said in a post from the other day, that we should have president here who is like a philosophy major or artist instead of a lawyer, for a change. Maybe someone who is really good at either of those things can really show us the way. A businessman or a lawyer maybe can't. That's been tried over and over again

I'm not far left, although I am definitely on the left side of the line (maybe 3 out of 10 lefty), and I'm certainly not an idealogue. I hate "cancel culture," and have strongly objected to removing statues and renaming schools and the like simply because we can't accept that our ancestors lived in their own culture, and can't be expected to reflect the attitudes of ours, which they couldn't even have contemplated.

I also know that we can't change other people. I'm gay, and I'm always going to be gay. You can make it illegal, or you can shun me for it, but it's not going to change who I am. We have to admit that although we'd like to give everybody the chance to attain a PhD, not everybody has the ability to get there, or even to a lower-level college or university degree. And yet, that's no reason not to help them, if we can, reach for the best they're able to achieve.

Yeah I think know what my limits are, I didn't want to take the press mechanic foreman job at my job because I just don't think I have quite the head for it. I just stick with being the material handler. But these baby boomers at my job better start training other people to do that, because it looks like they are all going to retire at the same time. However, I don't think that means I should be regarded as a disposable part of the hierarchy, I think I'm usually pretty useful at my role. Part of the problem we have in the west right now, is that if you're not the the top dog, you aren't regarded that well in greater western society. That's why no one I grew up with in the suburbs wanted to come work with me in the factory, and why many of the jobs there go to immigrants

I do kind of like listening to Douglas Murray

But this is a problem on both sides, not just left. The right really does think that you can create a society in which everybody marries the girl next door and has 2 1/2 kids and a couple of pets, go to church every Sunday and never, ever cheat on their spouse. Well, too bad, you can't, and for trying to do so by force, they deserve the dunce cap. And the left really does think you can make everyone "equal" by fiat -- that a person born physically male who "identifies" as female is certainly going to have developed characteristics, due to nothing more nefarious than the hormones their genes decided they produce more of, that make it unfair for them to compete against a person born with physically female who produces different hormones.

It seems like there might be unrealistic views on both sides, in my opinion, and well put. Although I don't totally follow you on the hormone thing (comprehension issue on my part).

But the problem with asking any of these questions, is that the hard leftists are probably going to consider the person asking them to be right-leaning (if you see how they debate), and I don't want to really be associated with the right. Often they call centrists as right-leaning (although I think maybe there are hardly any 'real' centrists, as people often aren't quite that passive about whatever they think)

 

[amorphous_constellation]

FWIW, I'm fine with opposing views save for those which are bigoted, misogynistic, and/or psychotic.

You know the thing with this kind of post, and I know I sort of debated you recently, is that it is so short, but so full of potential questions, that I cannot possibly really know exactly what you mean. And I definitely don't want to read into what is you might mean. Do you mean on the individual level? On the group level? Both? On the international stage? On the cultural level? Without another couple of sentences, I can't know what you mean

No one who was 'saner' or more level-headed than another person, would logically want to be in close the company of another who they sensed could get out of control. Whether that was a cell-mate, or a neighbor, or a coworker etc. Unless maybe they were a psychiatrist, or they studied that kind of thing

As to those who are bigoted and misogynistic, we are in a situation where you might have to first ask how someone defines those things, and if they are a leftist or a rightist, they might give vastly different frameworks. Depending on how they might perceive opposing views, they might read deeply into very basic, unqualified views. If I said that I believe in more traditional gender roles or marriage practices, that alone seems like a hard leftist might have a problem with that. Or if I said I just want to marry within my own tribe, then someone might say I'm bigoted. Such a person might not have a problem at all, with how other individuals sort out their own preference. And what might get lost in all this, is that that makes the biggest difference in the world, doesn't it?

What I wonder, is why leftism likes being so critical West? Are we not at the cutting edge of the liberal viewpoints? We all live together here in a federal system, you can freely associate with you want here. And maybe we do need to focus on getting along better together, yes there has been social trouble - but actually, I wonder how much most of that is an externality of economic stress. I think as the cost of living rises, people might get along less with each other.. maybe that's a no brainer right? What can been to lower the cost of living, why is property so expensive? Why are zoning laws like they are? Why did the grant's pass thing go to the supreme court? Doesn't that just add stress to the whole thing

 

[Heyo]

Then what does "How did you conclude that she's a woman? Having a husband is not a sufficient reason." mean if it had nothing to do with gender or LGBT? Please explain the intent to my dumb brain, because I'd sure hate to misrepresent your intent.

I never said that it has nothing to do with gender or LGBT. It obviously has. It is a reminder that gay couples now legally exist.
But it has nothing to do with homophobia. I didn't accuse you of ignoring gay couples wilfully.
I didn't even accuse you of ignoring gay couples unthinkingly. It just seemed that way. All we did see was that @SkepticThinker mentioned she has a husband and you realizing that she's a woman. That looks like a jump to conclusion to me.
You said you did look up her profile, but that was after my question and it wasn't your first response.

All I did care about was logic. And it wasn't even personally directed at you. You just happened to post an example that hinted at a possible non sequitur. Possible, so I had to ask to be sure.

 

[Eliana]

I never said that it has nothing to do with gender or LGBT. It obviously has. It is a reminder that gay couples now legally exist.
But it has nothing to do with homophobia. I didn't accuse you of ignoring gay couples wilfully.
I didn't even accuse you of ignoring gay couples unthinkingly. It just seemed that way. All we did see was that @SkepticThinker mentioned she has a husband and you realizing that she's a woman. That looks like a jump to conclusion to me.
You said you did look up her profile, but that was after my question and it wasn't your first response.

All I did care about was logic. And it wasn't even personally directed at you. You just happened to post an example that hinted at a possible non sequitur. Possible, so I had to ask to be sure.

Okay, so I was in fact correct in my assessment and yet people decided to attack me anyway, all because you felt lick kicking a hornets nest simply to arrogantly teach me a lesson. The irony is in your zeal to teach this dumb Jew girl the folly of making assumptions, you neglected to put ten seconds of thought into how I could have figured out her gender and made assumptions about me. Maybe perhaps you're the one who needs such a lesson.

People like you see that I'm a religious Jew and assume I must be some anti-LGBT transphobic bigot. I had one of the gang up group here attack me because they're still clenching their teeth over a prior thread, because they don't like my religious views and can't get the hell over it. Grown adults don't need you to teach them life lessons as if you are on some higher plane then the rest of us, and if you can't help yourself then just ask directly next time.

 

[Heyo]

People like you see that I'm a religious Jew and assume I must be some anti-LGBT transphobic bigot.

Making assumptions is your MO, not mine.

I had one of the gang up group here attack me because they're still clenching their teeth over a prior thread, because they don't like my religious views and can't get the hell over it. Grown adults don't need you to teach them life lessons as if you are on some higher plane then the rest of us, and if you can't help yourself then just ask directly next time.

I did ask.
And people didn't react to your first answer (even though that was a bit snarky), and not to your second answer (still snarky, but with more literary value). Only when you went Hulk mode, did they tell you to calm down.

I have a suspicion that I can't calm you down, so I will leave it at this. Maybe time will get your blood pressure down.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It's almost as if it didn't say "female" on your profile page/about.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

We were just having breakfast at a great little place in Stratford, and I noticed a man, probably in his mid to late 60s, walk in wearing a T-shirt which warned:

"Be careful not to always believe what you think."

 

[Secret Chief]

That is because you reason rationally. After all everyone knows that women cannot reason rationally. It is all that plumbing you know<ducks just in case>

You're brave.