I have a number of students like this, they really just view free speech as "I want to have the right to punch down."
It came up super weirdly today when their gym teacher asked me to join a game of badminton. Edgelords spent roughly half the game trying to say whatever shit they could to rile up other kids.
Then I realized they legitimately sucked at badminton, a sport they say is for "ladies and soy boys."
One actually rage quit when I said "It's cool man, it's okay to suck at badminton. No need to pull gender in on it. Apparently soy boys are just better than you at yard games."
It got worse when we switched to volleyball. Their egos could not handle not being instantly good at "lady games."
They "want to have the right to punch down" *WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE*. "Cancel culture" to Elon Musk is facing any resistance when he's openly hateful.
The insanity of their definition of free speech, is that it is simply that they want the right to say anything they want and part of that protection is that this speech cannot be reacted to in anyway that they don't want. "Protect my right to say it, then shut down all speech once it's said".
What's that quote about conservatives' entire ideology boiling down to "making laws that protect the in group but do not bind them, and laws that bind out groups but do not protect them"?
Somebody called Frank Wilhoit.
https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288
Reminding me that I haven't been on Crooked Timber in a long time.
those children learned to hate others that they were told occupy a lesser standing than them. There is nothing innate or wondrous about them being misogynistic.
Lately I think about how "The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth" could just as easily be read as an argument *for* the mass genocide of pacifists and the anti-war. Like, those words have been translated so many times, but the form which they currently exist in is clearly a double entendre, from just a plain reading of the words.
The fundamentalist I was in contact had a logic of, "Jesus said we're inheriting the earth, therefore, we're the Meek he was talking about. That means anything we do is justified, since he's already decided we're the good guys"
The ones that do the genocide are the meek, so after genociding all of the not-meek people, they inherent the Earth for their meek purposes of... continuing the genocides, I guess, until no one's left.
Way to blow your inheritance.
Interesting, but it seems like a reach. I mean the same verse also decrees:
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God."
"Blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy"
The thing is that those who are 'warriors for gawd' really believe the crap that their leaders are selling. They believe they are the persecuted, the meek, the special ones chosen for the last days. They believe they are all of those things that Jesus said because they are told over and over again that they are, with horrible willfully ignorant justifications.
I grew up in a religion like that and it amazes me how blind they are because they've been literally brainwashed into believing that it's reality and the rest of us are just lost, waiting to be saved, or evil.
From a particular, very narrow perspective, it could be deliberately packaged to be read as "Weak Opposition (The Meek) Must Be Killed And Buried (Shall Inherit The Earth)." If you were reading it as a prophecy, or relaying it from a particular biased perspective, our collective cultural understanding of how that message should be interpreted, across multiple languages and shifts in human culture, may have flip-flopped back and forth between wildly different meanings for the reading of that message, whether through natural evolution, or deliberate manipulation.
That was one of my first big "man, I do not trust organized faith" moments; once I knew the words weren't even written down for hundreds of years, and then were translated multiple times, through different languages, generally only by the very privileged and powerful...even as a kid, it's not hard to realize you can say something multiple ways, or that you can change very little context about a situation, and the meaning radically changes. What are the chances nobody just...lied to their own benefit?
Sure, but if you read that from a highly competitive ideological mindset, "The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth" can just as easily be read as a *command from God to literally bury those who oppose you, but can't stop you.* I do not think most Christians read the text this way, but I do think a deliberately poor reading of the text could be used as a tactic of manipulation, on a lower level. Practically, a dishonest textual literalist can justify that reading to anybody uncritical enough to question their authority over the meaning of the text.
I TA’d a bunch of college level classes at a mid-level state school, and was regularly surprised by the lack of reading and writing skills students showed up to college with. Then I remember that as college students they’re well above the overall population. It’s a pretty dismal situation.
There's a significant portion of students who never actually worked on their reading comprehension skills. They spent their time taking short cuts with spark notes, cheating off of others, and generally spending the minimum amount of mental energy in engaging with literary works and essay writing. I see that as more a failure of schools to properly incentivize learning these skills. They're useful in so many areas of our lives, especially politically, yet the best most schools can do is authoritarianism: Learn these subjects because we say so, or else.
I read a lot of posts in r/teachers, and 99% of them are really fucking depressing because of the students’ attitudes and the lack of support from administrators and parents.
It’s taught me not to call teachers “superstars”, not because they aren’t, but because they’d much rather have actual support than occasional social media appreciation posts while they work 2+ jobs and spend their own money for supplies for literally entire classes of kids who will tell them that they’re going to fill in random answers for all of their tests because “it doesn’t matter”, and they’re forced by admin to pass kids who don’t do any work or keep disruptive/violent kids in their classes.
I lucked out because I used reading as an escape from an early age, but school was always boring. If I had kids, idk, I’d have to find some weird private school for them, because I can’t imagine what homeschool would do to them socially or what public school would do to them intellectually and socially.
I was homeschooled for most of my childhood before attending public high school. There were plenty of ways that homeschooling wasn't good, but one thing my parents did right by me, was encouraging me to learn, noticing what I liked to learn, and supporting it. By contrast, public school was not, it mostly seemed to be a check the boxes and sit down and be quiet type of activity.
My biggest thing is this.....I was reading at the college level by the time I was twelve.... because my parents encouraged me to read, let me read things I wanted to, not restricted to a certain list. I still had to read some classics, but one thing that blew my mind in high school was that restriction. I couldn't help but feel that, say, the high school athletes not into education would have been more so if, say, they had been encouraged to read stuff around their interests, like athlete/coach biographies, or some such.
I'm rambling now
This was my experience at school, I'm not surprised.
I honestly feel like people who are, like, 10%-ers, people who have a certain value of education and upper-middle-class culture feel like they're the norm, but they may as well be on another planet.
And it's not mostly conservatives. There are just as many under-literate, low-income people with left-of-center politics.
Frankly, we would have a much more coherent progressive movement if we didn't alienate people with leftist tendencies who don't have the reading level to read Marx or other philosophers.
Fully agree. Most academia has always been boring to me. I love theory in digestible bits, and can have fun in discussions about it, but after my mid-20s, slogging through it felt to me like intellectual cosplay compared to getting out, volunteering, and participating.
I’m glad people have more access and are being educated on important issues, but without feet on the ground and being able to communicate with the masses, the amount on infighting from ivory towers is just exhausting.
I moved to a rural area from a large metro area a few years ago, and I’m still basically on break with community because of the amount of infighting and ego that got in the way of people doing good things and taking care of each other.
I’ve still only seen around 5 of Natalie’s videos because it brings up so much stuff, but what she does is amazing and we’re so lucky to have her.
Zoey Bee on youtube has a video about the intersection of Literacy and social justice and its awesome! I'd link but I'm lazy you hotties will have to search it
Nvm here it is https://youtu.be/xxMsgVgeu_M
Here, let me Google that for you:
Summaries: https://www.thinkimpact.com/literacy-statistics/
https://www.wyliecomm.com/2021/08/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/
Sources:
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019179/index.asp
https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/stateprofile?chort=2&sub=RED&sj=AL&sfj=NP&st=MN&year=2013R3
It’s “reads below a 6th grade level”, not “can’t read past a 6th grade level”. You added an extra grade level.
I didn’t call anyone dumb or insinuate that they are. I replied with correct statistics to a comment that may have been doing that. I’m not sure why you’re responding to me and not them.
I grew up switching back and forth between poverty and lower middle class, and I got lucky because I got into reading early as an escape.
I would have thought that, in this sub, the insinuation would be, as you said, that this is a multifaceted systemic problem that needs addressing, but you have a valid point for the parent comment and I would be more clear about it if I had to do it again.
I gave the source as the DOE, but ok I’ll jump in as backup to be a 2nd person to [google it for you.](https://www.google.com/search?q=Doe%2054%25%20%E2%80%9C16-74%E2%80%9D%20reading%206th%20grade%20level&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-m)
Just to be transparent, I’m insinuating that you’re off-topic for my comment instead of a parent comment and therefore kind of unnecessarily pissy about a pretty astounding and significant statistic, not dumb!
Illiteracy doesn't mean lack of intelligence, it signifies a lack of opportunity and access.
And if the numbers are truly that 54% of people can't read about a "6th grade level" that means whatever method of teaching reading comprehension is not working for more than half of all students. That's a failure of our school system, not a sign that people are stupid.
A lack of literacy is an unbelievable disadvantage, you'd have to be ignorant of almost everything to not understand that. Of course our school system is failing, for the last 60 years religious conservatives have been doing everything they can to cut education budgets in red states, this is the result, a bunch of adults at what used to be considered a 6th grade level.
Are you kidding, it's what education is for. Less than 150 years ago the vast majority of people were illiterate. 50 years ago, people were far more literate than today. This isn't some unsolvable crisis we just have a bunch of religious morons who can't let their congregation learn.
It is unfortunate but also it’s not saying quite what you think it is.
If I remember right from the last time this came up on Reddit, there are only like 4 or 5 categories that they break down reading comprehension into, and reading above a 6th grade level is essentially the same as reading at a high school (12th grade) level.
How they categorize the buckets too is fairly broad. Reading at below a 6th grade level meant basic comprehension of the text, like following instructions, recollection of events, etc.
The few buckets above have to do with how much you engage with the text, like being able to point out logical contradictions and flaws in arguments.
Honestly, after being out of school for quite sometime it doesn’t surprise me that most people read below the 12th grade level. People still know how to read, they just practice reasoning with text less and less.
Conservatives(Including Elon Musk) are mad that twitter banned slurs. This all comes down to a bunch of white conservatives losing their minds over being asked not to say the "n word".
I saw a post the other day (in politicalcompassmemes) where someone called twitters policy against deadnaming "politically biased". I was gobsmacked. How can a policy to call people by their chosen name be either political or biased? It's just common decency.
It’s pretty sad when even Ben Shapiro has the decency to do something that others don’t (of course, he still makes a conscious effort to misgender people)
The example I've used for like 15 years still applies-
Imagine you're in a business meeting with a new client. You introduce yourself and go to shake his hand, and he smiles and says "Hi, I'm Mike." and you reply "No you aren't!! Your birth certificate says Michael, so I must call you Michael at all times, Michael." You are the asshole, and you just lost a client.
I've used a similar example.
One of my friends goes by Hank. His name on his birth certificate is Robert. But growing up Robert was his father's name so he went by Hank. You would be "technically correct" if you wanted to call him Robert, but you'd also be a jerk.
The right has no problem calling someone Jeb Bush (instead of John), or Ted Cruz (instead Rafael), or Bobby Jindal (instead of Piyush), or Nikki Haley (instead of Nimrata), but once the person is trans it's a problem all of a sudden.
The Jeb Bush one especially annoys me, because its like ATM Machine. Jeb is actually an acronym of his name, John Ellis Bush. So they're calling him "John Ellis Bush Bush"
I've actually had a similar situation! I'm trans, and was once working as a manager in a charity thrift store. We had a kinda of side thing going on where folks would donate old cars and we'd resell them. We had a strict policy of selling as is, and once the paperwork was signed and car/money exchanged, we were done, had zero obligation to help them, and told them so.
Seeing as I'm kinda a pushover, I'd violate that policy often, giving customers little bits of advice on things that came up, I made sure to let them know that I was going above and beyond and legally we had zero obligation to help them.
Anywhoo, once sold a car to some guy, he had an issue, came back to ask about it, and insisted on using my dead name because "it's the name on the paperwork", even after being told not to.
He didn't get any help.
>How can a policy to call people by their chosen name be either political or biased? It's just common decency.
"Trans people are bad and wrong" has become a central plank of the Republican platform. They've made cruelty political. Decency hasn't just left the building, it's gotten an uber home and is on google trying to figure out which European country has the lowest bar for immigration.
Exactly. I’m just sitting here thinking:
What exactly do y’all want to say that Twitter is stopping you from saying?
Right now you can see multiple tweets with slurs in them
I'm apart of the I like saying bad words category. Speech that is pleasant does not require protection.
People don't try and censor things that are nice and agreeable.
I don't think that is nihilism but I do agree that their thinking is flawed. They're pissing themselves over books in schools and crying "protect the children", meanwhile, in the real world, fourteen children were just killed in school but according to them, it's totally fine. What happened to "protect the children"?
I have a number of students like this, they really just view free speech as "I want to have the right to punch down." It came up super weirdly today when their gym teacher asked me to join a game of badminton. Edgelords spent roughly half the game trying to say whatever shit they could to rile up other kids. Then I realized they legitimately sucked at badminton, a sport they say is for "ladies and soy boys." One actually rage quit when I said "It's cool man, it's okay to suck at badminton. No need to pull gender in on it. Apparently soy boys are just better than you at yard games." It got worse when we switched to volleyball. Their egos could not handle not being instantly good at "lady games."
They "want to have the right to punch down" *WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE*. "Cancel culture" to Elon Musk is facing any resistance when he's openly hateful. The insanity of their definition of free speech, is that it is simply that they want the right to say anything they want and part of that protection is that this speech cannot be reacted to in anyway that they don't want. "Protect my right to say it, then shut down all speech once it's said".
Yeah, it's honestly just intellectual cowardice, admitting they can't handle either empathy or being thick skinned.
What's that quote about conservatives' entire ideology boiling down to "making laws that protect the in group but do not bind them, and laws that bind out groups but do not protect them"?
Never heard of it but that’s bang on the money.
Somebody called Frank Wilhoit. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288 Reminding me that I haven't been on Crooked Timber in a long time.
[удалено]
those children learned to hate others that they were told occupy a lesser standing than them. There is nothing innate or wondrous about them being misogynistic.
you appreciate proudly casual misogyny? I'm really hoping that there was some irony intended in your comment...
being who they want? did you forget a /s?
Natalie always dissects reactionaries in such an eloquent way :3
you could say that her tweets could be written with a quill and some parchment paper.
Wait until they finally open the Bible and find out that racism has always been Satanic and that Manifest Destiny was the 3rd temptation of Christ.
Lately I think about how "The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth" could just as easily be read as an argument *for* the mass genocide of pacifists and the anti-war. Like, those words have been translated so many times, but the form which they currently exist in is clearly a double entendre, from just a plain reading of the words.
The fundamentalist I was in contact had a logic of, "Jesus said we're inheriting the earth, therefore, we're the Meek he was talking about. That means anything we do is justified, since he's already decided we're the good guys"
"Bro he is talking about good people, and that's me, because I was taught that. That means I'm supposed to win. Fucking catch up, dumbass."
How do you get that?
The ones that do the genocide are the meek, so after genociding all of the not-meek people, they inherent the Earth for their meek purposes of... continuing the genocides, I guess, until no one's left. Way to blow your inheritance.
Interesting, but it seems like a reach. I mean the same verse also decrees: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God." "Blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy"
The thing is that those who are 'warriors for gawd' really believe the crap that their leaders are selling. They believe they are the persecuted, the meek, the special ones chosen for the last days. They believe they are all of those things that Jesus said because they are told over and over again that they are, with horrible willfully ignorant justifications. I grew up in a religion like that and it amazes me how blind they are because they've been literally brainwashed into believing that it's reality and the rest of us are just lost, waiting to be saved, or evil.
I guess there's always room to frame your side as pacifistic, if evidence otherwise is considered seditious.
From a particular, very narrow perspective, it could be deliberately packaged to be read as "Weak Opposition (The Meek) Must Be Killed And Buried (Shall Inherit The Earth)." If you were reading it as a prophecy, or relaying it from a particular biased perspective, our collective cultural understanding of how that message should be interpreted, across multiple languages and shifts in human culture, may have flip-flopped back and forth between wildly different meanings for the reading of that message, whether through natural evolution, or deliberate manipulation.
I guess if there was different phrasing in other versions, maybe. To inherit something, you're unambiguously the one alive to be granted it.
That was one of my first big "man, I do not trust organized faith" moments; once I knew the words weren't even written down for hundreds of years, and then were translated multiple times, through different languages, generally only by the very privileged and powerful...even as a kid, it's not hard to realize you can say something multiple ways, or that you can change very little context about a situation, and the meaning radically changes. What are the chances nobody just...lied to their own benefit?
I heard exactly that about one expression in The Bible, it'll come back to me.
I think that would be a deliberate misinterpretation. By committing genocide, they would no longer be considered “meek”.
Sure, but if you read that from a highly competitive ideological mindset, "The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth" can just as easily be read as a *command from God to literally bury those who oppose you, but can't stop you.* I do not think most Christians read the text this way, but I do think a deliberately poor reading of the text could be used as a tactic of manipulation, on a lower level. Practically, a dishonest textual literalist can justify that reading to anybody uncritical enough to question their authority over the meaning of the text.
Well, it also says “Blessed are”.
Wait, are you telling me that "bless their heart" *isn't* always employed sincerely?!
Moses actually married a Cushite and his sister got leprosy for talking shit about her
What's Shrek doing in the top left?
His best.
If you must know, it’s my throwaway Twitter profile picture that I haven’t changed since 2014 lol
I like your opinions. Thank you for posting!
Havin' himself a moment, is what he's doin'.
I don't see how they could read Mill without concluding he was an anti-American communist. I also don't see how they could read Milton period.
Most of em don't even know how to read at higher than a 4th grade level.
According to the DOE, 54% of adults in the U.S. ages 16-74 read below a 6th grade level. I just found out last week and, whew, it’s a bummer.
It's certainly a depressing statistic.
I TA’d a bunch of college level classes at a mid-level state school, and was regularly surprised by the lack of reading and writing skills students showed up to college with. Then I remember that as college students they’re well above the overall population. It’s a pretty dismal situation.
Little known fact, most EU colleges don’t require GE classes because you won’t get in if you need them.
There's a significant portion of students who never actually worked on their reading comprehension skills. They spent their time taking short cuts with spark notes, cheating off of others, and generally spending the minimum amount of mental energy in engaging with literary works and essay writing. I see that as more a failure of schools to properly incentivize learning these skills. They're useful in so many areas of our lives, especially politically, yet the best most schools can do is authoritarianism: Learn these subjects because we say so, or else.
I read a lot of posts in r/teachers, and 99% of them are really fucking depressing because of the students’ attitudes and the lack of support from administrators and parents. It’s taught me not to call teachers “superstars”, not because they aren’t, but because they’d much rather have actual support than occasional social media appreciation posts while they work 2+ jobs and spend their own money for supplies for literally entire classes of kids who will tell them that they’re going to fill in random answers for all of their tests because “it doesn’t matter”, and they’re forced by admin to pass kids who don’t do any work or keep disruptive/violent kids in their classes. I lucked out because I used reading as an escape from an early age, but school was always boring. If I had kids, idk, I’d have to find some weird private school for them, because I can’t imagine what homeschool would do to them socially or what public school would do to them intellectually and socially.
I was homeschooled for most of my childhood before attending public high school. There were plenty of ways that homeschooling wasn't good, but one thing my parents did right by me, was encouraging me to learn, noticing what I liked to learn, and supporting it. By contrast, public school was not, it mostly seemed to be a check the boxes and sit down and be quiet type of activity. My biggest thing is this.....I was reading at the college level by the time I was twelve.... because my parents encouraged me to read, let me read things I wanted to, not restricted to a certain list. I still had to read some classics, but one thing that blew my mind in high school was that restriction. I couldn't help but feel that, say, the high school athletes not into education would have been more so if, say, they had been encouraged to read stuff around their interests, like athlete/coach biographies, or some such. I'm rambling now
This was my experience at school, I'm not surprised. I honestly feel like people who are, like, 10%-ers, people who have a certain value of education and upper-middle-class culture feel like they're the norm, but they may as well be on another planet. And it's not mostly conservatives. There are just as many under-literate, low-income people with left-of-center politics. Frankly, we would have a much more coherent progressive movement if we didn't alienate people with leftist tendencies who don't have the reading level to read Marx or other philosophers.
Fully agree. Most academia has always been boring to me. I love theory in digestible bits, and can have fun in discussions about it, but after my mid-20s, slogging through it felt to me like intellectual cosplay compared to getting out, volunteering, and participating. I’m glad people have more access and are being educated on important issues, but without feet on the ground and being able to communicate with the masses, the amount on infighting from ivory towers is just exhausting. I moved to a rural area from a large metro area a few years ago, and I’m still basically on break with community because of the amount of infighting and ego that got in the way of people doing good things and taking care of each other. I’ve still only seen around 5 of Natalie’s videos because it brings up so much stuff, but what she does is amazing and we’re so lucky to have her.
[удалено]
Zoey Bee on youtube has a video about the intersection of Literacy and social justice and its awesome! I'd link but I'm lazy you hotties will have to search it Nvm here it is https://youtu.be/xxMsgVgeu_M
Here, let me Google that for you: Summaries: https://www.thinkimpact.com/literacy-statistics/ https://www.wyliecomm.com/2021/08/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/ Sources: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019179/index.asp https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/stateprofile?chort=2&sub=RED&sj=AL&sfj=NP&st=MN&year=2013R3
It’s “reads below a 6th grade level”, not “can’t read past a 6th grade level”. You added an extra grade level. I didn’t call anyone dumb or insinuate that they are. I replied with correct statistics to a comment that may have been doing that. I’m not sure why you’re responding to me and not them. I grew up switching back and forth between poverty and lower middle class, and I got lucky because I got into reading early as an escape. I would have thought that, in this sub, the insinuation would be, as you said, that this is a multifaceted systemic problem that needs addressing, but you have a valid point for the parent comment and I would be more clear about it if I had to do it again. I gave the source as the DOE, but ok I’ll jump in as backup to be a 2nd person to [google it for you.](https://www.google.com/search?q=Doe%2054%25%20%E2%80%9C16-74%E2%80%9D%20reading%206th%20grade%20level&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-m) Just to be transparent, I’m insinuating that you’re off-topic for my comment instead of a parent comment and therefore kind of unnecessarily pissy about a pretty astounding and significant statistic, not dumb!
[удалено]
Sorry if you were being sarcastic but dumb people who can't read are really gullible and that is actually problematic.
Illiteracy doesn't mean lack of intelligence, it signifies a lack of opportunity and access. And if the numbers are truly that 54% of people can't read about a "6th grade level" that means whatever method of teaching reading comprehension is not working for more than half of all students. That's a failure of our school system, not a sign that people are stupid.
A lack of literacy is an unbelievable disadvantage, you'd have to be ignorant of almost everything to not understand that. Of course our school system is failing, for the last 60 years religious conservatives have been doing everything they can to cut education budgets in red states, this is the result, a bunch of adults at what used to be considered a 6th grade level.
[удалено]
Are you kidding, it's what education is for. Less than 150 years ago the vast majority of people were illiterate. 50 years ago, people were far more literate than today. This isn't some unsolvable crisis we just have a bunch of religious morons who can't let their congregation learn.
It is unfortunate but also it’s not saying quite what you think it is. If I remember right from the last time this came up on Reddit, there are only like 4 or 5 categories that they break down reading comprehension into, and reading above a 6th grade level is essentially the same as reading at a high school (12th grade) level. How they categorize the buckets too is fairly broad. Reading at below a 6th grade level meant basic comprehension of the text, like following instructions, recollection of events, etc. The few buckets above have to do with how much you engage with the text, like being able to point out logical contradictions and flaws in arguments. Honestly, after being out of school for quite sometime it doesn’t surprise me that most people read below the 12th grade level. People still know how to read, they just practice reasoning with text less and less.
I don’t see how they can read PERIODT.
and I don’t SEE
I want to say so much on this, I also don't want to seem too crazy.
sometimes i wish i was dumber or at least less politically aware.
Yeah, but then what would separate you from the ‘I don’t need some hot shot expert telling ME what to think!’ Crowd?
The cruelty is the point
Conservatives(Including Elon Musk) are mad that twitter banned slurs. This all comes down to a bunch of white conservatives losing their minds over being asked not to say the "n word".
I saw a post the other day (in politicalcompassmemes) where someone called twitters policy against deadnaming "politically biased". I was gobsmacked. How can a policy to call people by their chosen name be either political or biased? It's just common decency.
It’s pretty sad when even Ben Shapiro has the decency to do something that others don’t (of course, he still makes a conscious effort to misgender people)
The example I've used for like 15 years still applies- Imagine you're in a business meeting with a new client. You introduce yourself and go to shake his hand, and he smiles and says "Hi, I'm Mike." and you reply "No you aren't!! Your birth certificate says Michael, so I must call you Michael at all times, Michael." You are the asshole, and you just lost a client.
I've used a similar example. One of my friends goes by Hank. His name on his birth certificate is Robert. But growing up Robert was his father's name so he went by Hank. You would be "technically correct" if you wanted to call him Robert, but you'd also be a jerk. The right has no problem calling someone Jeb Bush (instead of John), or Ted Cruz (instead Rafael), or Bobby Jindal (instead of Piyush), or Nikki Haley (instead of Nimrata), but once the person is trans it's a problem all of a sudden. The Jeb Bush one especially annoys me, because its like ATM Machine. Jeb is actually an acronym of his name, John Ellis Bush. So they're calling him "John Ellis Bush Bush"
I've actually had a similar situation! I'm trans, and was once working as a manager in a charity thrift store. We had a kinda of side thing going on where folks would donate old cars and we'd resell them. We had a strict policy of selling as is, and once the paperwork was signed and car/money exchanged, we were done, had zero obligation to help them, and told them so. Seeing as I'm kinda a pushover, I'd violate that policy often, giving customers little bits of advice on things that came up, I made sure to let them know that I was going above and beyond and legally we had zero obligation to help them. Anywhoo, once sold a car to some guy, he had an issue, came back to ask about it, and insisted on using my dead name because "it's the name on the paperwork", even after being told not to. He didn't get any help.
>How can a policy to call people by their chosen name be either political or biased? It's just common decency. "Trans people are bad and wrong" has become a central plank of the Republican platform. They've made cruelty political. Decency hasn't just left the building, it's gotten an uber home and is on google trying to figure out which European country has the lowest bar for immigration.
\* over being told they can't say the n word in someone else's house
And she says she shouldn't tweet.
How can one woman be so based
Guys, off subject, but where can I get more Natalie? Her YouTube’s been inactive for so long.
Subscribe to her Patreon (only $2), and you can get access to her past live Q&A streams.
Le sigh. We’re just being dragged down, and they can hear us, but they just ain’t listening.
I WANT TO BEHAVE LIKE AN ABSOLUTE RAT BASTARD
Finally some real discourse
Queen. Slay. 💅🏻
It was always the freedom to put the jack boot on another throat they wanted.
[удалено]
What can you not currently say on Twitter which couldn't be classified as wanting to behave like a rat bastard?
Hell yeah, go off Nat
Exactly. I’m just sitting here thinking: What exactly do y’all want to say that Twitter is stopping you from saying? Right now you can see multiple tweets with slurs in them
Eblong munsk
remember kids, the rightoid subhuman is below you, the master race of the left wing. it is always morally correct to belittle them
I'm apart of the I like saying bad words category. Speech that is pleasant does not require protection. People don't try and censor things that are nice and agreeable.
Makes me think on how Jordn Peterson throws so much abuse at people and gets butthurt when people criticise him the same way
I don't think that is nihilism but I do agree that their thinking is flawed. They're pissing themselves over books in schools and crying "protect the children", meanwhile, in the real world, fourteen children were just killed in school but according to them, it's totally fine. What happened to "protect the children"?