4 4
winsor

Woke is a Joke

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, metalslug said:

"U.S. Congress" is not a proper noun. It's two words; "U.S." is a proper noun, "congress" is a noun. In a hypothetical future it can change to "Chinese Congress", (if assuming they maintain a congress at all after invasion). 

You'll have to take it up with Britannica....

https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/proper-noun

 

Your constitution says all powers shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, it doesn't say Congress. Hence, US Congress is most certainly a proper noun, with a definition. Please let me know when you expect it to change and what the new name will be.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SkyDekker said:

You'll have to take it up with Britannica....

https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/proper-noun

 

Your constitution says all powers shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, it doesn't say Congress. Hence, US Congress is most certainly a proper noun, with a definition. Please let me know when you expect it to change and what the new name will be.

Nah mate. Australian powers shall not be vested in a congress of the United States. The U.S. is just the most commonly held example of congress but they don't own copyright on the word, else it would never be necessary for the word "congress" to be preceded with the letters "U.S." for context.  Asked and answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, metalslug said:

Australian powers shall not be vested in a congress of the United States. The U.S. is just the most commonly held example of congress but they don't own copyright on the word, else it would never be necessary for the word "congress" to be preceded with the letters "U.S." for context.

Actual text:

Quote

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Notice how House of Representatives and Senate do not get a United States designation? Hence Congress of the United States (or U.S. Congress) is the name of the body. Hence US Congress is a Proper Noun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, metalslug said:

It is absolutely different and, as grammar goes, you really should know better. You're equating pronouns (he, she) with proper nouns (William, Bill) .

Oh, I am doing more than that.  I am also comparing (not equating) prefixes like "Mr." "Mrs." "Miss" to proper names - both first and last - and pronouns.  They are all part of what people call you.  And you get to choose them.

Quote

 then others would be equally entitled to choose their own adjectives (handsome & brilliant)

An excellent point.  My wife is a physician.  She prefers to go by "Mrs."  Are you going to insist on calling her "Dr." because that's what her prefix should literally be?

And yes, if you want people to call you "handsome" by all means start demanding that.  Heck, legally change your name to Handsome Slug.  I assume that since you used that example you never met the late great Handsome Dave DeWolf (who was an awesome guy.)

Quote

"U.S. Congress" is not a proper noun. 

A excellent example of Skitt's Law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

Actual text:

Notice how House of Representatives and Senate do not get a United States designation? Hence Congress of the United States (or U.S. Congress) is the name of the body. Hence US Congress is a Proper Noun.

Fair enough. I'll acknowledge that. 'Congress' can be both depending on context. The proper nouns I had used in my examples (William and Bill) do not denote defining characteristics of the person bearing the name (unlike 'he' and 'she'). That was rather my intended point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Fair enough. I'll acknowledge that. 'Congress' can be both depending on context. The proper nouns I had used in my examples (William and Bill) do not denote defining characteristics of the person bearing the name (unlike 'he' and 'she'). That was rather my intended point.

What Does William Mean? 

The name William is a timeless classic with English roots that date back almost a thousand years, yet is still popular today. It means "resolute protector" or "strong-willed warrior" and comes from Wilhelm, of Old German origin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kallend said:

There is a perfectly good singular pronoun with no gender/sex connotations:  "it".

Or "they" or "them" (which is also used as a singlular pronoun in English.)  I prefer those pronouns to to "xie" or "xer" or some of the other constructed pronouns but again, I'm OK with people using cis pronouns for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2022 at 9:37 PM, mistercwood said:

I was mocking up some data for work and saw an option to use Facebook's gender selections for a gender field, so finally decided to see what the list actually contained.

For some reason I thought it was going to be all neo-pronouns and random shit like people choosing to be trans-cats or something, based on the reactions to it. Colour me surprised when it is actually as plain as you said - it's just minor variations on trans-X. So you might have:

  • Trans-man
  • Transsexual-man
  • Transsexual-male
  • Transgender male
  • Transgender man
  • Trans male
  • Female to Male

...and a few others that would fit here, even though they might not really appear to be any different.

I would argue sure, there's not a scientific basis for this delineation, but there doesn't need to be. These appear to be more personal/refined expressions of something that's broadly the same, but can have slightly different meanings to an individual - you know, like on a spectrum? It's to let people use words they are comfortable with to describe themselves, while still sitting within pretty stock standard English language variations.

To interpret this as trans-people changing genders like they change their clothes (aka for "funsies") is a wilfully obtuse reading of the service Facebook are providing. It's barely any different to offering a preferred name or nickname option - my name is Christopher Wood, but I go by Chris or Woody depending on social context (never Christopher), however they're still all me. I just have a preference for which ones I use.

As per usual, this just sounds like another generic conservative media beat-up topic.

 

Gender is a grammatical construct.  Sex is biological.

You can self-identify as a lesbian poodle if you wish.  That does not MAKE you a lesbian poodle, even with the requisite surgery, hair transplants and whatnot..

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, winsor said:

Gender is a grammatical construct.  Sex is biological.

You can self-identify as a lesbian poodle if you wish.  That does not MAKE you a lesbian poodle, even with the requisite surgery, hair transplants and whatnot..

 

BSBD,

Winsor

How should people treat each other? As they wish to be treated (within limits -- no one thinks my "Queen of Fucking Everything" patch on my jumpsuit means I'm actually a queen), or as you wish to treat them? To me, basic politeness indicates that as much as reasonable, I should treat people as they wish to be treated, until they give me specific cause either to not treat them at all (i.e. walk away), or treat them otherwise. Nearly always, I'll walk away rather than treat someone poorly -- there's just no future, and it doesn't make me a better person to fuck with someone else.

So when faced with that self-described lesbian poodle, do you call them by name, do you say arf, do you introduce them to a nice human boy with a giant dick who's "sure to please," or do you just talk about them behind their back?

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wmw999 said:

How should people treat each other? As they wish to be treated (within limits -- no one thinks my "Queen of Fucking Everything" patch on my jumpsuit means I'm actually a queen), or as you wish to treat them? To me, basic politeness indicates that as much as reasonable, I should treat people as they wish to be treated, until they give me specific cause either to not treat them at all (i.e. walk away), or treat them otherwise. Nearly always, I'll walk away rather than treat someone poorly -- there's just no future, and it doesn't make me a better person to fuck with someone else.

So when faced with that self-described lesbian poodle, do you call them by name, do you say arf, do you introduce them to a nice human boy with a giant dick who's "sure to please," or do you just talk about them behind their back?

Wendy P.

Kind of none of the above.

Living in Greenwich Village, New Hope, and other gay hot spots, one encounters people living quite a variety of lifestyles.  The general consensus is okay, whatever.

If someone wants to be addressed as one thing or another, that's fine.  If someone wants to be treated as male or female, that's generally no big deal.  There are gay and lesbian people who I'd trust more to look after my kid more than some breeders I know.

This is incidental to my point.  Even if I am cool with someone living as another sex or species, that does not mean that they ARE another sex or species.  I'm not mad at them, I wish them no harm, and I don't particularly care one way or another so long as they don't hurt anyone else.

When my insurance paid for sex reassignment surgery for one of our flight attendants, but denied coverage for treatments they considered 'elective,' that bothered me.  Whether a co-worker has female anatomy as standard equipment or aftermarket is not my concern - until I have to pay for it.

I have lived around delusional people my whole life (religion being the prime culprit), and generally am okay with it if they leave me out of it.  When they want me to get audited for Scientology or pray to Jesus, I am not.

I reserve the right to deem people who think sex is a matter of choice as fucking retards.  YMMV.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, winsor said:

I reserve the right to deem people who think sex is a matter of choice as fucking retards.

Well it is a matter of choice. I believe they call it rape when you don't offer a choice.

 

15 minutes ago, winsor said:

When my insurance paid for sex reassignment surgery for one of our flight attendants, but denied coverage for treatments they considered 'elective,' that bothered me.  Whether a co-worker has female anatomy as standard equipment or aftermarket is not my concern - until I have to pay for it.

Why was your personal insurance paying for sex reassignment surgery for a flight attendant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, winsor said:

When my insurance paid for sex reassignment surgery for one of our flight attendants, but denied coverage for treatments they considered 'elective,' that bothered me.  Whether a co-worker has female anatomy as standard equipment or aftermarket is not my concern - until I have to pay for it.

So in this entire thread (and all the others that your obsession with wokeness has overtaken) you haven’t been criticising anything more than one insurance companies policy around gender reassignment surgery?

 

Sure, that sounds totally believable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought this was interesting. Winsor referred to "sex reassignment surgery" though he has also said that it is impossible to assign sex. Consistence in logic should have him referring to it as gender reassignment surgery, as jakee did.

 

image.png.d3b21dda6e40e67a24aaaa3d4a8c4cdc.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, winsor said:

When my insurance paid for sex reassignment surgery for one of our flight attendants, but denied coverage for treatments they considered 'elective,' that bothered me.

Why? Those would only be comparable if being trans was just a pick and choose thing, not something inherent in the person... so I don't know why that would bother yo--

3 hours ago, winsor said:

I have lived around delusional people my whole life (religion being the prime culprit), and generally am okay with it if they leave me out of it.  When they want me to get audited for Scientology or pray to Jesus, I am not.

I reserve the right to deem people who think sex is a matter of choice as fucking retards

Oh there it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US right and trump love Orban, he is a Putin ally and he is up to his usual.

"The International Auschwitz Committee of Holocaust survivors called the speech "stupid and dangerous".

Mr Orban's spokesman said the media had misrepresented the comments.

The speech took place on Saturday in a region of Romania which has a large Hungarian community.

In it, Mr Orban said European peoples should be free to mix with one another, but that mixing with non-Europeans created a "mixed-race world".

During his speech, the Hungarian leader also appeared to make light of the Nazi gas chambers in World War Two when he criticised the EU's plan to cut gas demand by 15% by pointing out that "the past shows us German know-how on that".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mistercwood said:

Why? Those would only be comparable if being trans was just a pick and choose thing, not something inherent in the person... so I don't know why that would bother yo--

Oh there it is. 

When SJWs breathlessly object to archeologists identifying skeletons as male or female because we don't know how they 'identified,' this is a sure sign that they are hard of thinking. 

I shouldn't lump them in with the Special Ed. crowd, since they would give a bad name to the kids on the short buses, who are generally nicer than average.

Woke ideology supports the lyrics of "The Refreshments'" hit single.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, winsor said:

When SJWs breathlessly object to archeologists identifying skeletons as male or female because we don't know how they 'identified,' this is a sure sign that they are hard of thinking. 

I shouldn't lump them in with the Special Ed. crowd, since they would give a bad name to the kids on the short buses, who are generally nicer than average.

Woke ideology supports the lyrics of "The Refreshments'" hit single.

And this is something to do with your insurance because…..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jakee said:

And this is something to do with your insurance because…..?

Because unlike those of us who pay for different things that we don't want or agree with, insurance is private. Or something like that.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Because unlike those of us who pay for different things that we don't want or agree with, insurance is private. Or something like that.

Wendy P.

Not quite.  Flight crews had a common policy, and what they did or did not pay for affected all of us.

It was considered an insult that expensive elective surgery was covered for political reasons, and other every bit as legitimate procedures were not.

If he wanted to become a she enough to pay for it. fine.  Having us pay for it by applying political pressure didn't go over too well.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

Because unlike those of us who pay for different things that we don't want or agree with, insurance is private. Or something like that.

Wendy P.

Private or not, what does it have to do with  his insurance?

He was asked why he cares about trans pronouns so much and in the space of two posts he’s gone from “I only care when it affects me directly, otherwise I’m not bothered at all” to “and don’t even get me started on how to identify skeletons! When will the madness end!!!”

 

I mean, we all knew he was lying the first time, but still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jakee said:

And this is something to do with your insurance because…..?

It's more an opportunity to demonstrate his intellectual superiority to archaeologists, social justice warriors, trans people, the woke crowd, insurance adjusters, scientologists, nonbinary people, religious people, groups of Russian, Chinese and German people and doctors who specialize in GRS.  More to come, I am sure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me a good opportunity to observe the absurdity of our system of private medical insurance than anything else. Here, gender reassignment costs maybe $75K plus care depending on options in Thailand maybe $6-7K all in, or out, as the case may be. Given the numbers of potential reassignments at a certain level it's a number not worth the argument. Also, we just don't have enough data or other understanding to know if the psychological benefits to the individual has an economic benefit to society over time. I mean if someone lost their nose (and in BillVon's case I'd pay personally to get that beak fixed) we'd want to get them whole and we wouldn't complain it's an unnecessary vanity procedure. Same with repairing disfigurements, cleft palates etc. In the case of the flight attendant, I wonder if it's not a case of a Captain concerned about the integrity a certain landing field. For me, if it would bring back before take-off drinks in first class, I'm all for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

4 4