America - The Official Thread

[BobK]

I don't think he needs the help.

Oh I agree he doesn't need the help, he's doing a great job of it all by himself. But my point still stands.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I think what he's meaning to say is if Trump gets made fun of in a political comic or on a late night show he gets really uptight and offended about it.

Okay, what does that have to do with my post as if I'm a Trump supporter. There should be a commentary on his actions at all times, just like there has for former presidents. If Trump gets upset, oh well.

 

[Johnnypenso]

...
Do you not read my post at all?
Do you get to choose what race/gander or even species when you get born.
If you do not identify yourself as the gender or race you should be able to change it to what you want, but imagine what hell a transgender person must live through before he/she gets to make the change. Do you even think gays are making a choice one day: -Hmm being straight sucks, I never get to bring any ladies home from any party. What if I became gay, because I have seen that they always bring someone home from a party. Do you really think it is like that? Come on...

I see you have updated your post...


OMG, should I even respond to this childish argumentation? OMG

You didn't say anything about "when you get born" so I put up pic's of two people who chose to live life as a different race from their birth race. So you're saying that someone should just be able to choose their race as well? Can I voice my objection to what they are doing without it being hate speech?

Them being wrong doesn't make you right. Your race is biological, it's cultural attachment that's optional.

Nice selective quoting and removing all the context that followed.

 

[Encyclopedia]

This getting of topic and this is the last thing I'll say about it.

T
If you're intentionally misgendering someone just because you despise them or want to offend them then I'd agree it's a dick move, however if you simply don't agree with what they identify for whatever reason, I don't think it's that bad, you can't change how they think.

It might not make much difference to the trans person. Misgendering can be deeply hurtful wheter it's with malice or not.

In both cases you show that you don't give a crap about the persons feelings.

 

[Pillo-san]

You didn't say anything about "when you get born" so I put up pic's of two people who chose to live life as a different race from their birth race. So you're saying that someone should just be able to choose their race as well? Can I voice my objection to what they are doing without it being hate speech?
Nice selective quoting and removing all the context that followed.

How could you not assume that? facepalm, it is so obvious is it not? No one decides what race or sexual orientation they are born into/with Cultural is something different. My energy is so drained. What TenEightyOne said is obvious and cant understand you are quoting him making selective quoting..

 

[DK]

"President Bannon" is sounding less like a ribbing and more like reality with each passing day.

The key excerpt from the above link:

Mr. Priebus bristles at the perception that he occupies a diminished perch in the West Wing pecking order compared with previous chiefs. But for the moment, Mr. Bannon remains the president’s dominant adviser, despite Mr. Trump’s anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council, a greater source of frustration to the president than the fallout from the travel ban.

 

[Johnnypenso]

How could you not assume that? facepalm, it is so obvious is it not? No one decides what race or sexual orientation they are born into/with Cultural is something different. My energy is so drained. What TenEightyOne said is obvious and cant understand you are quoting him making selective quoting..

I responded to what you wrote. If you meant something different you should be more careful with how you communicate. By the way, the two people in those pictures were attempting to pass themselves off as biological African Americans, not just culturally, so the questions remain. If someone can choose their gender, why not their race? Are we free to talk about it? What if I disagree and think it's ridiculous, can I make a speech about it?

 

[Pillo-san]

Yeah I see the flaw of you jumping to a conclusion. There is a difference between me telling a person they can't be transgender and me not seeing them being a female, when they physically are a male. Now is it my call to deny them the medical desire to be something other than male? No! Did I say it in that way as you've painted it? Not even close. So the next part of you painting this ad hominem argument of how I fear some forced transgender whatever on the population is just outright inane because no where do I say that.



Free speech isn't that hard to understand. You not liking what they say doesn't change their ability to say it and right to do so. This isn't hate speech, me calling Kris Jenner a male during transition, doesn't show hate, it shows me perceiving a person on how the look outwardly.



Wow you really just seemed to read a snippet and run with it, never did I say anything about forbidding, so please go back and read the entire thing.



Maybe it's the language barrier thing, but I have no idea what you're talking about, and how you're so confused by the English in the post you supposedly read.



What the heck does that have to do with my post? No where do I bring up right or left, so...

Some of you posting in here lately are really out of your depth.



Which is the exact point I was making on Gender, I recognize what I can biologically see as a male or female. If I call them such but culturally or mentally they don't like that and see themselves as something else. I was in no way producing hate speech. If I personally still view them as such afterwards but respect their desire otherwise, it's still not hate. I agree with race on the same level, just cause you don't want to be labeled as something you biologically represent doesn't mean people are calling you it out of spite.

You in these examples is more like a stereotypical representation of Republicans ie those from the right wing, not necessarily you in person per say. I do not know you and all I know of is what you have written here on the forum, making it pretty much impossible to really know you. Therefore I have to jump to conclusions to make a point even if it is over exaggerated because it is needed to show my thought process/argumentation.

You are free to say what you want but then you are free to receive the precipitation that follows if someone is thinking you have offended them. It is a free country after all is it not? But do not think that that kind of "Free speech" is what Free speech is really about.. If you do, you are mistaken.

"Offended" in those situations means something else then just simply saying you dont like someone...
Like I said, mutual respect is what we all have learned in school, God Hates Fags or Jews something something or what ever is not what counts simply as being "offended". Those that say my right to "free speech" is undermined when they spout that nonsense are abusing real Freedom of speech.


I think It was Hassan Minhaj at Daily show that in a monologue about Trump, said that republicans referred to lefties as snow flakes, meaning that they easily got offended. And that Trump is the King of snow flake or something as he gets offended by everyone and everything. Like now when he says that every poll about his popularity is fake

If a trans sexual came onto you and you did not know that she was a he before until the day you propose how would you react?

Damn, it is hard to see what your quotes are referring to so I will have to go back and give better answers, if I have energy left

I responded to what you wrote. If you meant something different you should be more careful with how you communicate. By the way, the two people in those pictures were attempting to pass themselves off as biological African Americans, not just culturally, so the questions remain. If someone can choose their gender, why not their race? Are we free to talk about it? What if I disagree and think it's ridiculous, can I make a speech about it?

First, read my posts. Secondly. do not "latch onto/seize up/fixate" on something small that is not important for the whole. If I say: -I saw that four or five people dragged him to a black car, you do not need to say: -no it was dark blue car... Stick to the wholeness, not an unimportant part...
And third, read my posts, I know that the lady was indeed not black, even gave an explanation, even though the whole thing is pointless to even discuss..

I really feel my energy getting sucked away by childish arguments.

 

[Eh Team]

Okay, what does that have to do with my post as if I'm a Trump supporter. There should be a commentary on his actions at all times, just like there has for former presidents. If Trump gets upset, oh well.

I think it's something to do with people being called special snowflakes when Trump sort of is one himself.

 

[Famine]

Free speech is for being able to say what you want against the government and the like. It is not for to say that God hates Fags or that other races but your own are lesser or more dangerous or something.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I responded to what you wrote. If you meant something different you should be more careful with how you communicate. By the way, the two people in those pictures were attempting to pass themselves off as biological African Americans, not just culturally, so the questions remain. If someone can choose their gender, why not their race? Are we free to talk about it? What if I disagree and think it's ridiculous, can I make a speech about it?

Gender (in British English) is something that can be self-determined, in American English it cannot (check the different dictionaries if you don't believe me). You cannot change particular biological definitions such as sex (which in intersex humans is problematic) or race.

Passing yourself off as being of African biology if you're in fact of White European biology is simply a lie. What one actually appropriates is the cultural heritage, not a biological one.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Trump has apparently declared that any polling that shows majority disapproval is fake news.

 

[McLaren]

I don't know about any polling, but the one that was recently quoted a lot came from CNN; I'm not sure I trust them to be completely fair with their results.

Politico posted an article 3 days ago stating however, that the approval ratings may not quite as low as mainstream news outlets would like folks to believe. There is an assumption, that like the election, Trump supporters are not vocal out of fear of being labeled. Anonymous polling shows a different rate of approval.

Poll Dates Mode Approve Disapprove Net approval
CBS News 2/1-2/2 Live phone 40% 48% -8
CNN/ORC 1/31-2/2 Live phone 44% 53% -9
Gallup 1/31-2/2 Live phone 43% 52% -9
Rasmussen Reports 1/31-2/2 Automated phone 54% 46% 8
Public Policy Polling (D) 1/30-1/31 Automated phone 47% 49% -2
Economist/YouGov 1/28-1/31 Internet 43% 44% -1
SurveyMonkey 1/26-1/30 Internet 48% 50% -2
POLITICO/Morning Consult 1/26-1/28 Internet 49% 41% 8
Quinnipiac University 1/20-1/25 Live phone 36% 44% -8

Average 44.9% 47.4% -2.6

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/donald-trump-popularity-polling-234630

Kyle Dropp, Morning Consult’s co-founder and chief research officer, acknowledged that the poll’s online methodology could explain why it showed Trump in better shape than other, live-interview surveys.

“There could be a mode effect at play like there was during the election,” Dropp said.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I don't know about any polling, but the one that was recently quoted a lot came from CNN; I'm not sure I trust them to be completely fair with their results.

Any polling is suspect - it's easy to establish a general idea of what the poll might say off the back of public sentiment, and then poll people accordingly.

But to suggest that any negative polling is a complete fabrication? It suggests that Trump either has no idea what the public are thinking, or that he doesn't want to hear any criticism no matter how well-founded it may (or may not) be.

 

[Com Fox]

This getting of topic and this is the last thing I'll say about it.


It might not make much difference to the trans person. Misgendering can be deeply hurtful wheter it's with malice or not.

In both cases you show that you don't give a crap about the persons feelings.

and what if they are forced to gender correctly? It shows that they don't give a crap about a persons view and opinion and has to do something against what they think just because of someone's feeling, regardless of any logic.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It's not a question of "what they are feeling". It lt's a question of what they are.

 

[Com Fox]

It's not a question of "what they are feeling". It lt's a question of what they are.

Not entirely true, that's assuming all trans feel the same which isn't true, we don't all trans people and it's not right to assume they'll be the same. It all depends on the receiver, some will shrug it off, some will feel offended, some will react in another way.

However, it will harm the other person if regardless of what they think they have to talk in a certain way, regardless of you think it's wrong to misgender, you are robbing him of his free speech.

One will be 100% effective regardless of the person, the other varies depending on the persons feelings, meaning you're costing everyones freedom to express and speech just because some people were offended even though they aren't trying to strip them off their freedom.

 

[huskeR32]

Not entirely true, that's assuming all trans feel the same which isn't true

He's not making that assumption at all.

He's saying that somebody's gender identity is a part of who they are; he's politely trying to tell you that it's a bit insulting to trivialize it by reducing it to "just a feeling."

 

[Encyclopedia]

and what if they are forced to gender correctly? It shows that they don't give a crap about a persons view and opinion and has to do something against what they think just because of someone's feeling, regardless of any logic.

Yes, what if.... As far as I know no one is forbidden to misgender someone. My only arguement is that you're being a real dick if you do. And you're going to have to accept the social consequences of that. Just because you can do/say something doesn't mean that you should.

Also, you can't compare being trans to an opinion. The two aren't the same.

 

[nobuffalo]

Not sure of the specifics but I believe this is about an issue with the whole gender pronoun thing in Ontario. There's a great podcast with him and Joe Rogan about the issue, 3 hours long but a great listen. Jordan Peterson is pretty interesting to listen to and they go in depth about some other things as well.



For the record I haven't actually looked into the legislative side of it, just a quick search suggests that Jordan is misinterpreting things.

 

[Joey D]

Free speech is for being able to say what you want against the government and the like. It is not for to say that God hates Fags or that other races but your own are lesser or more dangerous or something. It has nothing to do about feelings per say, not for those that are on the "receiving end" It is about spreading skewed opinions rooted in hate/dislike(feelings) of that person to divide people against people and are harmful.

Free speech is being able to express opinions without fear of censorship. As long as you're no infringing on the rights of others, which lets face it words can't really do that, then you're free to say what you like and other are free to call you an ass because of it.

What do you think about KKK, do you think an organisations like that is ok to exist after all their crimes? Should they not be viewed as a terrorist organisation? It is not about the "opinions" by themselves, it is what they lead to.. If a person is not capable to function as a human being and is a behaving more like a psychopath, do you not agree he should have guidelines so that he will have an easier way/time to function in the society?

I don't support the actions of the KKK but I believe they have the right in the USA to express their beliefs, however misguided and hateful they might be. If the start harming other, causing vandalism, or the like, then they are violating the rights of another person and thus should be punished within the confines of the law.

People in the Right wing are complaining that their way of life is restricted by the state yet they want to restrict the life of others? People on the right are biggest hypocrites I know of.. It is fine if they can do as they please but no one else is allowed to have the same rights as them.

The extreme right and left are both hypocrites, to say otherwise is being blind to what's going on in the world. The right wants to dictate your morality and your faith, the left wants to dictate your money and your acceptance, in reality both are wrong. You morality and faith are your own, as is your money and your acceptance of others. Act how you want, believe in what you want, keep your money, and accept whoever you think you should as long as you don't violate another's rights to do so.

Them being wrong doesn't make you right. Your race is biological, it's cultural attachment that's optional.

Most anthropologist would argue race is a social construct, as is a ethnicity, and I'm inclined to believe them. Your skin color and features, or phenotype if you prefer, are biological. Race is just a label put on you to lump you into a group of people based off of set criteria of things. Given how much integration there is in the world today, race is becoming harder and harder to define.

I think what he's meaning to say is if Trump gets made fun of in a political comic or on a late night show he gets really uptight and offended about it.

Weirdly, he's right. Trump is a classic definition of a "snowflake", he thinks he's beautiful and unique and deserves special attention because he's going to "make America great again".

 

[Com Fox]

He's not making that assumption at all.

He's saying that somebody's gender identity is a part of who they are; he's politely trying to tell you that it's a bit insulting to trivialize it by reducing it to "just a feeling."

I'm not saying Trans is just a feeling. Talking about the Trans feelings in general, though might've read it wrong.

Yes, what if.... As far as I know no one is forbidden to misgender someone. My only arguement is that you're being a real dick if you do. And you're going to have to accept the social consequences of that. Just because you can do/say something doesn't mean that you should.

Also, you can't compare being trans to an opinion. The two aren't the same.

I will agree that there are still consequences for misgendering someone, even if you have a right too, because people have a right to retaliate to that too.

I don't agree with the should part though, I don't think someone should be dictated to say anything to someone "correctly".

I'm not comparing being trans and an opinion like that as they are different, however they both are supported by stuff governing our freedom, Trans are allowed to freely express themselve due to this and I support that. We are also allowed to make our decisions and have our own say on matters I support that as well. I simple support both freedoms and don't think it's any sort of dickish. It would be dickish to attempt to remove any of these freedoms from both parties.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The White House publishes a list of seventy-eight incidents that it classifies as terror attacks and accuses the global media of deliberately under-reporting them. Included in this list is the stabbing death of a backpacker in Queensland which police determined to be a murder.

 

[Com Fox]

The White House publishes a list of seventy-eight incidents that it classifies as terror attacks and accuses the global media of deliberately under-reporting them. Included in this list is the stabbing death of a backpacker in Queensland which police determined to be a murder.

Wait, why would America report an Australian incident?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Wait, why would America report an Australian incident?

They're not just Australian incidents. They're from all over the western world. The Trump administration is trying to position this as a spate of terrorist attacks that were not adequately reported (and thus the world was unaware of them), demonstrating the need for the immigration ban. The story on the seventy-eight incidents specifically drew attention to the stabbing in Queensland because it was never considered or classified as a terror attack; I linked to it so that people could follow up on it. If there are other, similar incidents that the White House classify as terror attacks, it looks like they're fudging the numbers.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The White House publishes a list of seventy-eight incidents that it classifies as terror attacks and accuses the global media of deliberately under-reporting them. Included in this list is the stabbing death of a backpacker in Queensland which police determined to be a murder.

A guy kills a woman in front of 30 people while shouting Allahu Akbar, stabs another guy in the head, neck and torso 20 times who eventually dies, stabs a hostel employee in the leg, kills a dog, assaults 12 police officers and shouts Allahu Akbar during his arrest as well. Not sure how that gets confused with terrorism, sounds like a typical murder to me.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

A guy kills a woman in front of 30 people while shouting Allahu Akbar

Is alleged to have shouted it. Funny how thirty witnesses couldn't corroborate it. It's also funny that this alleged terrorist had the opportunity to murder thirty-two people and yet only killed two of them - a woman he was believed to be romantically involved with, and a bystander who tried to stop him.

 

[Imari]

I don't agree with the should part though, I don't think someone should be dictated to say anything to someone "correctly".

You don't have to say anything correctly. You can call them whatever you want.

The rest of us are free to think whatever we like of you for doing so, and to voice that opinion. Except on GTP, where the AUP says we're not allowed to abuse people.

A guy kills a woman in front of 30 people while shouting Allahu Akbar, stabs another guy in the head, neck and torso 20 times who eventually dies, stabs a hostel employee in the leg, kills a dog, assaults 12 police officers and shouts Allahu Akbar during his arrest as well. Not sure how that gets confused with terrorism, sounds like a typical murder to me.

It's like how you can spot American terrorists because they always yell "I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA!"

 

[Scaff]

Oh dear, that botched raid just got a bit more botched.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...rget-al-qaeda-leader-yemen-raid-a7566211.html

Screw up the Intel, SEAL gets killed, civilians including children die and now find out you missed the target and then get taunted by them about it.

 

[Carlos]

They're not just Australian incidents. They're from all over the western world. The Trump administration is trying to position this as a spate of terrorist attacks that were not adequately reported (and thus the world was unaware of them), demonstrating the need for the immigration ban. The story on the seventy-eight incidents specifically drew attention to the stabbing in Queensland because it was never considered or classified as a terror attack; I linked to it so that people could follow up on it. If there are other, similar incidents that the White House classify as terror attacks, it looks like they're fudging the numbers.

We should even report on things that didn't happen. (Bowling green massacre)