Red Mosquito

Ms Harmless wrote:nobody cares if you're cynical "universally", this thread isn't about how far out and agreeable the universe is

Then people should probably stop throwing out general accusations of broad cynicism? Why are you quoting me, when you should be quoting him?

B wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:Language evolves. It's fine. Who cares?

But what happens when the people driving that evolution aren't white cis make Americans? People might start to use terms like "micro-aggression," "systemic racism," and "unconscious bias." And then some of our societies hierarchies may start to flatten and put Blacks, women, and maybe even trans individuals on an equal footing with me!

How would one know if they are a "white" person?

BurtReynolds wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:nobody cares if you're cynical "universally", this thread isn't about how far out and agreeable the universe is

Then people should probably stop throwing out general accusations of broad cynicism? Why are you quoting me, when you should be quoting him?

Come on, man. Just embrace that you're a cynical contrarian. Just because you can be labeled doesn't make you any less special.

all of my medical records say that I am female, and all of my doctors know what anatomy I have; that is all they need to know -- I am a woman with a Y chromosome and various secondary "sex" characteristics that indicate that I was assigned male at my birth (and other secondary sex characteristics to indicate that I am not to be assigned that way now)

I have Spina bifida and Hydrocephalus; I am severely disabled, and there has never been, and never will be, any good reason to deny adequate -- and at times very serious -- healthcare to me based on my gender or sex history

I can appreciate the aspect of wokeness that embraces a radical subjectivism in which the world and words can be interpreted absolutely individually. Where it fails is that immediately collapses back into demands of universal objectivity. It would be a lot cooler if they conceived of themselves as biohackers trying to uncover bizarre novel subjectivities downstream of body process, instead of believing bad ontology.

But perhaps subjectivity and pluralism are mutually exclusive at the extremes...

BurtReynolds wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:nobody cares if you're cynical "universally", this thread isn't about how far out and agreeable the universe is

Then people should probably stop throwing out general accusations of broad cynicism? Why are you quoting me, when you should be quoting him?

because you were the one who said "just because I'm cynical about this, doesn't mean I'm cynical universally"; so I said well in this thread, nobody cares what you think outside of this thread

BurtReynolds wrote:I can appreciate the aspect of wokeness that embraces a radical subjectivism in which the world and words can be interpreted absolutely individually. Where it fails is that immediately collapses back into demands of universal objectivity. It would be a lot cooler if they conceived of themselves as biohackers trying to uncover bizarre novel subjectivities downstream of body process, instead of believing bad ontology.

But perhaps subjectivity and pluralism are mutually exclusive at the extremes...

we'll conceive of ourselves as we wish, thank you

JuanHamm wrote:Language evolves. It's fine. Who cares?

I care.

You wouldn’t be insinuating that my perspective is less important than someone else’s, now, would you?

JuanHamm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:nobody cares if you're cynical "universally", this thread isn't about how far out and agreeable the universe is

Then people should probably stop throwing out general accusations of broad cynicism? Why are you quoting me, when you should be quoting him?

Come on, man. Just embrace that you're a cynical contrarian. Just because you can be labeled doesn't make you any less special.

But I'm pretty stoked about life! you need to adopt a "tragic" worldview (in the Greek sense.)

Ms Harmless wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:I can appreciate the aspect of wokeness that embraces a radical subjectivism in which the world and words can be interpreted absolutely individually. Where it fails is that immediately collapses back into demands of universal objectivity. It would be a lot cooler if they conceived of themselves as biohackers trying to uncover bizarre novel subjectivities downstream of body process, instead of believing bad ontology.

But perhaps subjectivity and pluralism are mutually exclusive at the extremes...

we'll conceive of ourselves as we wish, thank you

Like I said: I can appreciate the aspect of wokeness that embraces a radical subjectivism...

BurtReynolds wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:nobody cares if you're cynical "universally", this thread isn't about how far out and agreeable the universe is

Then people should probably stop throwing out general accusations of broad cynicism? Why are you quoting me, when you should be quoting him?

Come on, man. Just embrace that you're a cynical contrarian. Just because you can be labeled doesn't make you any less special.

But I'm pretty stoked about life! you need to adopt a "tragic" worldview (in the Greek sense.)

I'm perfectly happy with my absurdism, thank you very much.

JuanHamm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:nobody cares if you're cynical "universally", this thread isn't about how far out and agreeable the universe is

Then people should probably stop throwing out general accusations of broad cynicism? Why are you quoting me, when you should be quoting him?

Come on, man. Just embrace that you're a cynical contrarian. Just because you can be labeled doesn't make you any less special.

But I'm pretty stoked about life! you need to adopt a "tragic" worldview (in the Greek sense.)

I'm perfectly happy with my absurdism, thank you very much.

It's the best.

Ms Harmless wrote:I read it correctly Bammer; rather than "correct" them, you can assume they weren't wrong and politely ask for clarification, then do as they ask

Noted. Time to cancel Microsoft as they continue to deploy Word with a very insensitive version of spellcheck.

Ms. Harmless, you were starting to reel me in but you’ve lost me again. We are - literally and figuratively - speaking different languages.

I know everyone here will respect my wishes going forward and no longer refer to me as “cis” as this is a word/term I have never used as a factor toward the way that I self identify.

Have you informed your wife that you're no longer cis?

Bammer wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:I read it correctly Bammer; rather than "correct" them, you can assume they weren't wrong and politely ask for clarification, then do as they ask

Noted. Time to cancel Microsoft as they continue to deploy Word with a very insensitive version of spellcheck.

Ms. Harmless, you were starting to reel me in but you’ve lost me again. We are - literally and figuratively - speaking different languages.

I know everyone here will respect my wishes going forward and no longer refer to me as “cis” as this is a word/term I have never used as a factor toward the way that I self identify.

you refuse to use "cis" because you would rather see yourself as "normal" and trans people as an abnormal other; we would rather you didn't -- cis is merely a description that means "this side of", meaning you agree with your assigned gender

I have no interest in reeling you in, I'm just living my life

if you don't like Microsoft, you may complain to, and about, Microsoft, without being labelled a tyrannical extremist

true story: someone asked me if I was 'cis' and I had no idea what it meant or how to answer it. as a straight, white guy who's junk matches my identity, i'm pumped to have something to be offended by now!

we've been using "cis" in so many lexicons and contexts since forever (cis / transatlantic, for example); we're just now applying it to gender, harming no one

warehouse wrote:true story: someone asked me if I was 'cis' and I had no idea what it meant or how to answer it. as a straight, white guy who's junk matches my identity, i'm pumped to have something to be offended by now!

so instead of CIS you prefer to be called tiny huh

Ms Harmless wrote:I have no interest in reeling you in

That's OK. Bammer has no interest in treating anyone with kindness or respect.