Red Mosquito

*She Arbor

JuanHamm wrote:

Rob wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:

Rob wrote:I think terms like “birthing people” or “menstruating people” and such are are too much, kind of dumb. But why do people get so worked up? I’ve yet to ever see someone offended by the term “woman” in real life.

The argument is that using the term women in a debate about abortion excludes people with vaginas that don't identify as women.

Right, I get it. I just don’t think we’re at the point (or ever really will be) where the terms “men” and “women” (male/female) are in jeopardy or considered offensive to anyone but the most hardcore activist types.

Agreed. I have never heard anyone talk about any of this stuff outside of Twitter.

Maybe I should spend more time in Ann Arbor.

last winter Ann Arbor was all I had

Dammit now I can’t listen to Rage anymore

tragabigzanda wrote:How I Could Just Kill a Fan

*(cover)

JuanHamm wrote:

Rob wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:

Rob wrote:I think terms like “birthing people” or “menstruating people” and such are are too much, kind of dumb. But why do people get so worked up? I’ve yet to ever see someone offended by the term “woman” in real life.

The argument is that using the term women in a debate about abortion excludes people with vaginas that don't identify as women.

Right, I get it. I just don’t think we’re at the point (or ever really will be) where the terms “men” and “women” (male/female) are in jeopardy or considered offensive to anyone but the most hardcore activist types.

Agreed. I have never heard anyone talk about any of this stuff outside of Twitter.

Maybe I should spend more time in Ann Arbor.

It's definitely a thing now:


Hawley's exploitative grandstanding ignorance aside, there seems to be a growing conflict over the definition of "woman" between a sociological concept and a biological one (basically gender identity vs sex). Both are valid in context but the flip-flopping back and forth on it has opened the door to broader issues amoungst many feminists where men can now claim the defining essential nature of an "adult female human", the biological potential to gestate and give birth, as something not unique to women. If that is true, then what is a woman other than a highly subjective abstract identity i.e. meaningless? And the second tweet quoted illustrates that with the comparison of the substitute language (birthing bodies) to a household appliance (air fryer). There's the real Handmaiden's Tale comparison. The corollary here is when the Roe disaster came down, it was 'A women's right to choose' and now that the furor over that has died down a bit it's back to newspeak like 'birth giver'. This is gonna be a big deal come November as both parties target suburban voters.

.

BurtReynolds wrote:I love how bi_3 is always sure to kneecap anyone who agrees with him in an attempt to appeal to people that absolutely despise him.

Otherwise known as the argo strategy: Placate your enemies and leave the people defending you out to dry; be alone.

It's not about winning, you gotta open the door Burt or the idea of considering the concept is rejected out right.

Eliza Mondegreen wrote:After all, what is there to disagree about? Lives are at stake, right? Either we agree, in which case there's nothing to talk about, or we disagree, in which case there's nothing to talk about. That's where so many progressive people and progressive organizations land these days.

.

Oh jeeeebus ship these people off to Mars and see how well they do without women.

Bi_3 wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:

Rob wrote:

JuanHamm wrote:

Rob wrote:I think terms like “birthing people” or “menstruating people” and such are are too much, kind of dumb. But why do people get so worked up? I’ve yet to ever see someone offended by the term “woman” in real life.

The argument is that using the term women in a debate about abortion excludes people with vaginas that don't identify as women.

Right, I get it. I just don’t think we’re at the point (or ever really will be) where the terms “men” and “women” (male/female) are in jeopardy or considered offensive to anyone but the most hardcore activist types.

Agreed. I have never heard anyone talk about any of this stuff outside of Twitter.

Maybe I should spend more time in Ann Arbor.

It's definitely a thing now:

No one is saying it isn’t a thing, just saying you can go about your life and use “men” and “women” and you’ll be ok.

Was it Burt who dismissed this as just a Twitter thing? What exceptional foresight!

.

spike wrote:Was it Burt who dismissed this as just a Twitter thing? What exceptional foresight!

Thank you?

BurtReynolds wrote: Its an institutionally imposed thing. Top down.

Yup. It's like a secret handshake indicating your group membership.

.

Bi_3 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:I love how bi_3 is always sure to kneecap anyone who agrees with him in an attempt to appeal to people that absolutely despise him.

Otherwise known as the argo strategy: Placate your enemies and leave the people defending you out to dry; be alone.

It's not about winning, you gotta open the door Burt or the idea of considering the concept is rejected out right.

Eliza Mondegreen wrote:After all, what is there to disagree about? Lives are at stake, right? Either we agree, in which case there's nothing to talk about, or we disagree, in which case there's nothing to talk about. That's where so many progressive people and progressive organizations land these days.

You have a pretty funny shtick.

.

BurtReynolds wrote:who can really say anything about anything really?

Toes out, girls, back to second position

Progressives:


Reality:


https://www.heart.org/en/news/2021/07/1 ... -solutions

In the U.S., Black people are twice as likely as their white counterparts to die of diabetes. They are three times as likely to end up hospitalized for diabetes-related complications. They are more than twice as likely to undergo diabetes-related leg or foot amputation. And they are more than three times as likely to have end-stage kidney disease.

Researchers have hunted for genetic causes, said Joseph, who leads a research group dedicated to improving diabetes prevention and treatment. But "genetics just does not explain a lot of Type 2 diabetes that we see in the United States."

The central issue, he said, is lifestyle factors that drive obesity, which a recent study in the Journal of the American Heart Association found may account for up to half of all Type 2 diabetes cases in the United States. And about 55% of Black women and 38% of Black men have obesity, according to American Heart Association statistics.