The Continent’s Consensus on Climate?……Crumbling

[Coreece 190]

On 4/14/2024 at 7:32 AM, lippy said:

process the larger message of the story: climate change is going to have the biggest affect on those with the fewest resources.

The story shows how the mere perception of climate change is having a positive effect.

While the (slight) overall increase in rain over the last hundred years, combined with recent record rain events may support the idea of climate change, for a sex worker it's just another shitty rainy day working in a rain forest during the rainy season.   A couple extra inches here and there isn't going to make much of a difference to their bottom line for the day -  it's still going to be a wash either way.

The rainy season was always less profitable, but if you attach "climate change" and "Trans" to the problem, you now suddenly get support groups that allow sex workers to realize that they'd much rather just start their own business than eat giant locusts with Joe Weber.

 

[SkyDekker 1,212]

On 4/20/2024 at 8:27 PM, Coreece said:

The story shows how the mere perception of climate change is having a positive effect.

While the (slight) overall increase in rain over the last hundred years, combined with recent record rain events may support the idea of climate change, for a sex worker it's just another shitty rainy day working in a rain forest during the rainy season.   A couple extra inches here and there isn't going to make much of a difference to their bottom line for the day -  it's still going to be a wash either way.

The rainy season was always less profitable, but if you attach "climate change" and "Trans" to the problem, you now suddenly get support groups that allow sex workers to realize that they'd much rather just start their own business than eat giant locusts with Joe Weber.

 

Turning street prostitution into brothels.....another clear win for Climate Change.

[Coreece 190]

9 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

On 4/20/2024 at 11:27 PM, Coreece said:

The story shows how the mere perception of climate change is having a positive effect.

While the (slight) overall increase in rain over the last hundred years, combined with recent record rain events may support the idea of climate change, for a sex worker it's just another shitty rainy day working in a rain forest during the rainy season.   A couple extra inches here and there isn't going to make much of a difference to their bottom line for the day -  it's still going to be a wash either way.

The rainy season was always less profitable, but if you attach "climate change" and "Trans" to the problem, you now suddenly get support groups that allow sex workers to realize that they'd much rather just start their own business than eat giant locusts with Joe Weber.

 

Turning street prostitution into brothels....

No.  The story is about male sex workers deciding to man up and get real jobs.  It says they were sick of the shitty rainy season, but I think they were just sick of. . . .sex work.  (had to keep it clean)

 

9 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

another clear win for Climate Change.

According to Bill, that would make you a Type 3 Denier - Believing that the effects of climate change would be good.

I don't see anything wrong with it, but the left can't have that.  It would dampen alarmism, complicating efforts to evoke sympathy from the emotionally retarded (college students, Gen Z, etc) and garner their votes.

But as I've already explained, this story doesn't really have anything to do with climate change.  It's almost like the writer was playing a game of Mad Libs, and decided to use it as the headline.

 

[billvon 2,592]

10 minutes ago, Coreece said:

According to Bill, that would make you a Type 3 Denier - Believing that the effects of climate change would be good.

Perhaps read his reply again, and see if you can figure out what rhetorical device he was using there.

[Coreece 190]

10 minutes ago, billvon said:

21 minutes ago, Coreece said:

According to Bill, that would make you a Type 3 Denier - Believing that the effects of climate change would be good.

Perhaps read his reply again, and see if you can figure out what rhetorical device he was using there.

Like many liberals, I think he feels that brothels are probably a good thing.  Doesn't matter tho, he was wrong.  The effect was people leaving sex work, which is always a good thing.  You can call me the type 3 denier if it makes you feel better.

[billvon 2,592]

18 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Like many liberals, I think he feels that brothels are probably a good thing.  Doesn't matter tho, he was wrong.  The effect was people leaving sex work, which is always a good thing.  You can call me the type 3 denier if it makes you feel better.

Or . . . . not.

[kallend 1,726]

8 hours ago, Coreece said:

Like many liberals, I think he feels that brothels are probably a good thing.  Doesn't matter tho, he was wrong.  The effect was people leaving sex work, which is always a good thing.  You can call me the type 3 denier if it makes you feel better.

Who needs brothels when you can just become a star. 

"When you are a star they let you do anything".

(Video available on request.)   

 

[Coreece 190]

21 hours ago, billvon said:

Or . . . . not.

Or. . .since steelmanning is way too much to ask of this place, maybe someone could just try to engage in good faith.  I offered a story with a few of the left's favorite things, (Climate change, Trans People and religious conservatives) but all we get is something about eating giant locusts with sex workers in Thailand, poor people vs white men, and Dekker's irrelevant nonsense about brothels. . .and of course, Trump.

[billvon 2,592]

33 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I offered a story with a few of the left's favorite things, (Climate change, Trans People and religious conservatives)

Imagine if someone came up to you and offered to give you all the things Christians loved - self-rejection, guilt and condemning homosexuality - if you'd just talk to him in good faith.

Would that work for you?

[jakee 1,284]

10 hours ago, Coreece said:

Or. . .since steelmanning is way too much to ask of this place, maybe someone could just try to engage in good faith.  I offered a story with a few of the left's favorite things...

Errm, yeah - but if you were engaging in good faith right now the next words in your post would have been "so I could say 'look how stupid this lefty story is".

[Coreece 190]

10 hours ago, billvon said:

10 hours ago, Coreece said:

I offered a story with a few of the left's favorite things, (Climate change, Trans People and religious conservatives)

Imagine if someone came up to you and offered to give you all the things Christians loved - self-rejection, guilt and condemning homosexuality - if you'd just talk to him in good faith.

Would that work for you?

Well it's a climate change thread, but ya I guess we could talk about that - Tho I'd say it's more about self denial than self rejection.  Self rejection might be more applicable to transgenderism.

Guilt is a natural human emotion that can lead to personal growth if handled in a healthy manner.

As for the last one, I wouldn't necessarily just single out homosexual sex as it's a subset of sexual immorality in general.

[Coreece 190]

11 minutes ago, jakee said:

11 hours ago, Coreece said:

Or. . .since steelmanning is way too much to ask of this place, maybe someone could just try to engage in good faith.  I offered a story with a few of the left's favorite things...

Errm, yeah - but if you were engaging in good faith right now the next words in your post would have been "so I could say 'look how stupid this lefty story is".

Well it is, right?  I felt my initial critique was fair enough.  I could go deeper into it, but I'm a bit pressed for time - moving into my new place.

[jakee 1,284]

44 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Well it is, right?  

So, being honest, what kind of serious conversation did you want as a result?

Not sure what the sayings are in your neck of the woods but kids around here get taught "ask a silly question, get a silly answer" at quite a young age.

[gowlerk 2,013]

2 hours ago, Coreece said:

As for the last one, I wouldn't necessarily just single out homosexual sex as it's a subset of sexual immorality in general.

Sexual immorality is just a construct. The only immorality would be if someone is taking advantage of a child or a person otherwise not able to give informed consent. Homosexual sex is not immoral. Men entering the priesthood then using the posistion of trust to take advantage of children is immoral. Likewise it is not immoral for a boy or a girl to feel they don't fit your expectations of their sexuality. It is a struggle, and it may be very difficult for them, but it is not immoral.

[billvon 2,592]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Sexual immorality is just a construct. 

And it changes rapidly.

200 years ago, interracial marriages were immoral.  It was immoral for women to have sex before marriage, but not men, since men needed sex to remain healthy.   Homosexuality was punishable by jail time.  Rape of colored women was not.

The mutability of morality is further proof that it's just a transient construct that will change again and again.

[JoeWeber 2,459]

2 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Sexual immorality is just a construct.

As are the belief systems that are the root cause.

[gowlerk 2,013]

18 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

As are the belief systems that are the root cause.

Sexual immorality is what other people do that I not only would not do, but also find off putting. Or, it is what I say I would not do but have actually done or want to do and I feel guilty about desiring it. 

[kallend 1,726]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Sexual immorality is what other people do that I not only would not do, but also find off putting. Or, it is what I say I would not do but have actually done or want to do and I feel guilty about desiring it. 

There are certainly activities that I find "off-putting".  I'm sure everyone has one or more things like that.

 To the greatest extent possible I avoid thinking about things I don't like, and just  let others get on with their own lives.

Some people, however, seem to obsess about what other people do in private, and get all bent out of shape about it.  These busibodies need to learn to mind their own business.

[wmw999 2,242]

3 hours ago, billvon said:

And it changes rapidly.

200 years ago, interracial marriages were immoral.  It was immoral for women to have sex before marriage, but not men, since men needed sex to remain healthy.   Homosexuality was punishable by jail time.  Rape of colored women was not.

The mutability of morality is further proof that it's just a transient construct that will change again and again.

And that’s why it all comes down to respect for me. Because by considering how to treat someone with respect, generally I don’t offend. That means my violently evangelical sister in law doesn’t hear about my transgender nibling. And, while “not offending” isn’t a primary objective all the time, I find people listen much better when treated with respect. And I find it easier to do so if I automatically find something to respect in them  

yeah, sometimes that’s not easy 

Wendy P. 

[gowlerk 2,013]

22 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

That means my violently evangelical sister in law doesn’t hear about my transgender nibling.

I may be slightly offended unless it turns out that you meant to type "sibling".

[JoeWeber 2,459]

22 minutes ago, kallend said:

There are certainly activities that I find "off-putting".  I'm sure everyone has one or more things like that.

 To the greatest extent possible I avoid thinking about things I don't like, and just  let others get on with their own lives.

Some people, however, seem to obsess about what other people do in private, and get all bent out of shape about it.  These busibodies need to learn to mind their own business.

They just can not avoid thinking about it because their interest isn't moral it's prurient. Often it's as simple as anger over others doing openly what they either secretly desire or merely have very natural curiosities or occasional wonderings. Like reformed smokers they incessantly proselytize against the behaviors as a way to keep the ideas, and pictures, fresh in mind. By claiming their interest is faith based they can avoid uncomfortable questions about their strange concerns. Of course, if the urges become uncontrollable there are always a spare set or two of vestments to don for additional camouflage.

[ryoder 1,451]

53 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I may be slightly offended unless it turns out that you meant to type "sibling".

No, she meant nibling.

It threw me as well, the first time she used the word, until I looked it.

[wmw999 2,242]

I first heard that Dorothy Parker coined it. But maybe not; the internet seems to disagree

Wendy P. 

[wolfriverjoe 1,400]

2 hours ago, ryoder said:

No, she meant nibling.

It threw me as well, the first time she used the word, until I looked it.

Interesting.

I learned something today.

Nibling: Gender neutral term for a child of a sibling (traditionally niece or nephew).

[gowlerk 2,013]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

I first heard that Dorothy Parker coined it. But maybe not; the internet seems to disagree

Wendy P. 

Well then, I'm no longer concerned that you may have meant nibbling. Which would have puzzled me greatly.