Legal Japan passes law to promote understanding of the LGBT community

nice gaijin said:

But of course the way Murray tells the story there's only one conclusion he wants to bring you to... I wonder why

Click to expand...

On one hand you are right to be agnostic about it. It is only one case and we don't have definitive proof. On the other hand, its a pretty likely conclusion so I don't think Murray is being bad faith about it. Just a bit too confident.

nice gaijin said:

It's a comfort to find yourself in a privileged group, especially when you did nothing in particular to deserve playing life on easy mode (note: that doesn't mean that life IS easy, just that it could be a lot harder if you change some variables).

Click to expand...

For starters I have to remind me you that we have never met. Just being White and male does not make me privileged.

I have never felt that I was a privileged member of any group...which is part of the reason I am here in Japan. I have always felt like the outsider. I am poor. I always have been. I have had lucky breaks by birth alone, but so have loads of people. But I cannot even get a credit card for various reasons I won't go into. I had to pay off ridiculous amounts of student loan debt. All I own is an old beat up car. I have had loads of girlfriends here but none in America, my own country. I had to leave my own country just to have a shot at happiness. I have been refused various jobs and services for who the hell knows why, here and in America. And that's just the half of it. There is a crap ton more that's just not your business and I won't be posting here. Dude, calling me privileged seems like a fat joke to me. You seriously have no clue on Pluto.

Besides which, anyone who has bothered to scratch the surface of men's rights knows that ordinary men are not privileged and they never were. Its women and children first. Men go down with the ship, especially if they are poor like me.

But how much have I complained really? Just cause I didn't doesn't mean I have few complaints. I just don't think my airing my personal complaints is going to fix anything. In fact, seems it just makes my life worse to do so.

nice gaijin said:

You act like there must be something wrong with me when I have compassion for people regardless of the body they find themselves in.

Click to expand...

That's not it. I find you to be too aggressive to start. Next, I think you subscribe to a false victim narrative that does not fit with the modern situation.

nice gaijin said:

but if that's the case then you didn't have much to begin with,

Click to expand...

I used to have loads. But to be fair third and fourth wave feminists are the ones that drained most of that well long before trans issues were ever in my field of view. But trans activists have certainly played their role.

Anyway, like I say, we will see. I am for as much equality as can be sanely accomplished, but I see trans activists as taking a sledgehammer to the good foundations that were built for LGBTQ+ and so are many others claiming to be in that community. My advice is to tone it down a notch and also to be sure all demands are truly about equality and not hegemony. I see trans activists making the same mistakes the feminists did in essence. But is your baby. Good luck.

Master of Time said:

Just being White and male does not make me privileged.

Click to expand...

This statement really means you are clueless. In the U.S. at least, just being the "default" gives you advantages that nobody else has.
Consider if you are right handed. That means you don't have to even think about the fact that tools, writing utensils, etc. are all designed with you in mind.
Whereas left-handed people are disadvantaged. They may not have the proper tools available to them. They may have to pay more or expend more effort to get them. They may even be forced to use their non-dominant hand in order to "cure" their "condition." And historically have been associated with the devil himself.
If you don't like the term privilege, call it advantage or bias. If you're white you have it.

mdchachi said:

This statement really means you are clueless. In the U.S. at least, just being the "default" gives you advantages that nobody else has.
Consider if you are right handed. That means you don't have to even think about the fact that tools, writing utensils, etc. are all designed with you in mind.
Whereas left-handed people are disadvantaged. They may not have the proper tools available to them. They may have to pay more or expend more effort to get them. They may even be forced to use their non-dominant hand in order to "cure" their "condition." And historically have been associated with the devil himself.
If you don't like the term privilege, call it advantage or bias. If you're white you have it.

Click to expand...

I don't think it could be put more simply than this:
That said, I am not denying that the there is racism against Black people in America that remains common and widespread especially by police and courts. But that is not my priviledge, its their oppression. I don't think native born Asion people in the U.S. have anything near the oppression Black people do.

The following video claims White privilege exists. But right off the bat it says its defined by stable housing, access to healthy food, affordable health care, family wealth, and livable wage.

Well I started life in a house with a mother, father and sister. Then my Mom threw my Dad out, and from two I grew up in a trailer court. My mother shoveled horse manure for a pittance. Before going to school, there I was, surrounded by horses in a filthy place that reeked of manure, freezing my tuckus off in the winter. A couple times I could have died for nearly getting stomped by runnaway horses. In elementary school I was diagnosed with malnutrition. I ate a crap ton of cheap old style American breakfast cereal growing up. Most vegetables were boiled free of vitamins. Also loads of sodas. Probably 1/3 of my clothes were handed down to me from my sister. Eventually my mother married my abusive step-father. After crashing her car he convinced my mother to move to a new state and sell the trailer. That lasted about a year. Then it was back to the old general area with a new (used) trailer. I hardly ever saw a doctor....despite having crazy high fevers a couple times. I had a hernia for years before my dad paid for an operation from the other side of the country. I went to the dentist a couple times. For some reason I got a filling in a baby tooth. The filling fell out in junior high. The rotting tooth was in my jaw until college where I decided to yank it out myself because there was no money for a dentist. After leaving America, I lived in Japan for many years. I tried to go back to America but there were no decent jobs to be had. My known grandparents had both died and left what they had to my mother and aunt. Soon that was all gone. My father died and left me nothing. My mother has nothing now.

So there you go. No stable housing, not much healthy food, avoidance of the hospital for the lack of money, near zero family wealth, and poverty wages or joblessness.

And you are going to tell me I have privilege just for being White?

No dude. I am positive the Black family that lived next door to my Grandmother had pretty much everything better than I did once the final balance sheet comes in.

The video ends by claiming White peope don't face racism. Yeah. If you are White take a stroll through Compton at night and see how that goes.

Master of Time said:

And you are going to tell me I have privilege just for being White?

Click to expand...

YES
Can you walk into just about any store in America and not be targeted as a possible shoplifter?
Can you go to a bank and try to deposit a $16000 check wiithout the cops being called on you?
Can you drive through just about any town and not be given a second look by the police?
Can you go anywhere in America and not be told to "go back to where you came from"?
Can you try to buy a house just about anywhere in the U.S. and not experience bias against your application?

The more well-to-do family next door had a much higher chance of experiencing things like this than you and I bet there's many stories they could tell you.

Would you seriously be open to experiencing America as a black person (under the equivalent economic and family conditions)? I suppose if you want to live in Compton it might be advantageous.

So, to recap

I used the second person to make a general point, not about you specifically (in fact I had myself in mind when I wrote that), but you, @Master of Time, read it as being directed specifically at you. Like you said, I don't know you, you could be literally anyone--you could be Zorro for all I know.

Let's look again at what I said:

It's a comfort to find yourself in a privileged group, especially when you did nothing in particular to deserve playing life on easy mode (note: that doesn't mean that life IS easy, just that it could be a lot harder if you change some variables). I believe that puts you in the position to help others and advocate for them.

Click to expand...

Your background is only relevant in explaining your own perspective. But even though I wasn't even talking about you, you took that personally and made my general statement about privilege wholly about yourself and your own lived experience... Which is precisely my point; your understanding of this topic is completely self-referential, and because the topic is so outside your own reality you are unable to see how your own biases have colored your perspective. Talking about your own struggles doesn't refute my point, it makes the point for me. You try to use your own challenges in life to stand above criticism, and then accuse me of subscribing to a false victim narrative. And you see no irony in this at all?

Privilege is the flipside to discrimination: the positive stereotypes, the "model minority" myths, the assumptions that others make based on appearance alone. It isn't all "gaijin smash;" it's not always something you choose to use, because it's about how other people perceive and treat you based on your appearance or perceived group membership. The only influence you can have on that is to try to hide your affiliations or identity, so you can "pass" as something else. It's not victim narratives or "playing the X card" to point out that some people are treated differently, and denying that it happens doesn't make it go away, it just ensure that it never gets addressed.

You said that you used to have loads of compassion, but that by the time you approached this topic you were running low because you were already sick of arguments from this other group. Again, that was my point; when you started becoming aware of this subject you had already entrenched yourself in one way of thinking, even if it was only to outright reject the other. If you were already so weary of feminists doing the wave or whatever, and someone not being nice enough to you was enough to make you decide you had no more sympathy for the people they advocate for, then no, there wasn't much compassion to speak of.

mdchachi said:

YES
Can you walk into just about any store in America and not be targeted as a possible shoplifter?
Can you go to a bank and try to deposit a $16000 check wiithout the cops being called on you?
Can you drive through just about any town and not be given a second look by the police?
Can you go anywhere in America and not be told to "go back to where you came from"?
Can you try to buy a house just about anywhere in the U.S. and not experience bias against your application?

The more well-to-do family next door had a much higher chance of experiencing things like this than you and I bet there's many stories they could tell you.

Would you seriously be open to experiencing America as a black person (under the equivalent economic and family conditions)? I suppose if you want to live in Compton it might be advantageous.

Click to expand...

I explained this already. Look man, you need to find yourself a dictionary. You gave examples of OPPRESSION. Those are NOT examples of PRIVILEGE.

And if you think a heavily accented redneck or hillbilly is going to go to somewhere like New York City and not experience some discrimination with regard to buying a house and being told "go back where you came from" I think you maybe live in some sort of bubble.

I myself have been told to go back to Europe. Hell, I even said this myself to other White people!

nice gaijin said:

Your background is only relevant in explaining your own perspective. But even though I wasn't even talking about you, you took that personally and made my general statement about privilege wholly about yourself and your own lived experience... Which is precisely my point; your understanding of this topic is completely self-referential, and because the topic is so outside your own reality you are unable to see how your own biases have colored your perspective.

Click to expand...

Okay, that's the last straw. This is straight up insane at this point.

He said "If you are White, you have it." No exceptions were allowed for. Well I am White, and I don't have it.. I showed proof of why I don't have it. (and I am clearly not alone). And you try and use that to show bias???? Or fixation on my own situation locking me into a perspective??? Even after I clearly admitted racial prejudice against Black people esp. in the police and justice system???

Maybe you should go berate one of those White people who say police never hassled them, therefore policing in America is surely just fine! Me though? You got nothing! Police have hassled me and so has airport security. And know Black people have it worse!

Just whatever dude. You go ahead and believe whatever the hell you want.

I neglected to link the video claiming White Privilege exists.

Anyone that thinks a random White person can go put their hand on the shoulder of a random cop with no issues is insane. Look at the picture.

Anyway, I never had any of what they claim is White privilege, loads of White people haven't, and loads of Black people have and so have loads of Asians.

Master of Time said:

I explained this already. Look man, you need to find yourself a dictionary. You gave examples of OPPRESSION. Those are NOT examples of PRIVILEGE.

And if you think a heavily accented redneck or hillbilly is going to go to somewhere like New York City and not experience some discrimination with regard to buying a house and being told "go back where you came from" I think you maybe live in some sort of bubble.

I myself have been told to go back to Europe. Hell, I even said this myself to other White people!

Click to expand...

You're splitting hairs. I already said you can choose to call it bias or something else if the word "privilege" sticks in your craw.
Can you honestly say that every other factor in your life being equal, you'd happily have been black instead of white in America?

mdchachi said:

Can you honestly say that every other factor in your life being equal, you'd happily have been black instead of white in America?

Click to expand...

Just read what I already wrote and take an educated guess.

Also the difference between oppression and privilege is hardly splitting hairs. In America: Rich people are privileged. White people are not. Black people are oppressed. White people are...bascially....not. If you cannot understand these differences you cannot see what is far more important to all of this.....the fact that America is ruled by a large, loose oligarchy which ensures all the corruption and social ills continue indefinitely through things like....miseducation and news media control that make people think that things that don't exist in fact do....all the while ignoring the things that actually exist and actually matter.

Telling Black people that I have privilege is a recipie to get Black people to hate White people all the while expecting an "equality" that is actually hegemoney that is never going to happen.

I am not splitting hairs. I am telling you vital basic facts that allow you to see what is actually going on.

Ordinary Americans need to organize against the corruption and misinformation of the rich and that well never happen if you hypersimplistically think that one man's oppression is just another man's privilege. That's on the level of saying that every person who is not my friend is my enemy, and declaring 7 billion people to be your enemy is not going to help you.

This thread is ostensibly about gender and sexual orientation. I never mentioned being white, but clearly this has struck a nerve. Again you're bringing your own identity and setting it in front of everything and making it all about you. You're SO convinced that because you've had a difficult life you couldn't possibly benefit from the fact that you apparently belong to privileged groups as a white, cisgendered, heterosexual male?

Ay, there's the rub.

Master of Time said:

Telling Black people that I have privilege is a recipie to get Black people to hate White people all the while expecting an "equality" that is actually hegemoney that is never going to happen.

I am not splitting hairs. I am telling you vital basic facts that allow you to see what is actually going on.

Ordinary Americans need to organize against the corruption and misinformation of the rich and that well never happen if you hypersimplistically think that one man's oppression is just another man's privilege. That's on the level of saying that every person who is not my friend is my enemy, and declaring 7 billion people to be your enemy is not going to help you.

Click to expand...

This is a bizarre stretch of the imagination. Showing that you understand privilege isn't going to annoy minorities nearly as much as telling them that you don't have any by bragging about how hard your life has been. I literally said in my first comment that mentioned privilege (hoping to avoid this whole sidebar discussion):

note: that doesn't mean that life IS easy, just that it could be a lot harder if you change some variables

Click to expand...

You just don't like the insinuation of a word because the way it's being used doesn't match your personal definitions. This is "banking collapse" all over again.

I get it, no warfare but class warfare. Roll out the guillotines already.

nice gaijin said:

You're SO convinced that because you've had a difficult life you couldn't possibly benefit from the fact that you apparently belong to privileged groups as a white, cisgendered, heterosexual male?

Click to expand...

It is interesting that I took your accusation of being privileged as being related to being White pretty much only. But I chalk that up to the overwhelming bulk of that accusation in my life being tied to being White.

Me trying to set you onto the path of the stories of a multitude of others is neither me bragging nor complaining. I am just trying to find a way to get you to understand logically that what you and mdchachi have emotionally got yourselves invested in is not true. Obviously, logic is not going to work....but its all I have got to offer...so.....we will be getting nowhere.

As for calling me "cisgender" I recommend against calling normal people such a word if you want to "win". But yeah, you will do what you want in any case.

Master of Time said:

It is interesting that I took your accusation of being privileged as being related to being White pretty much only. But I chalk that up to the overwhelming bulk of that accusation in my life being tied to being White.

Me trying to set you onto the path of the stories of a multitude of others is neither me bragging nor complaining. I am just trying to find a way to get you to understand logically that what you and mdchachi have emotionally got yourselves invested in is not true. Obviously, logic is not going to work....but its all I have got to offer...so.....we will be getting nowhere.

As for calling me "cisgender" I recommend against calling normal people such a word if you want to "win". But yeah, you will do what you want in any case.

The history of ‘cisgender’ — now that Elon Musk has deemed it a ‘slur’ on Twitter - National | Globalnews.ca

'Cisgender' was first coined in 1994 by a grad student looking for a way to refer to people who aren't transgender without implying that one identity is 'normal' and one isn't.

globalnews.ca

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure why you keep trying to project an emotional response on us, like we're somehow blinded to your impeccable dispassionate logic or something. I understand where you're coming from, I've just encountered this exact argument before and I've found it lacking in several ways that I've already laid out ad nauseum.

As for "cisgender," it was meant as a descriptive--literally for lack of a better word--but If you take offense to it and have a preferred term I'll use that in the future.
It looks to me like Musk is just pandering to his trolls. it's telling that the use of the "n-word" and other slurs have skyrocketed since his takeover, and he's removed protections against people getting misgendered and deadnamed... but "cis" is where he draws the line? Weird.

Did you read the article by Dana Defosse? What do you think of what they had to say?

nice gaijin said:

As for "cisgender," it was meant as a descriptive--literally for lack of a better word--but If you take offense to it and have a preferred term I'll use that in the future.

Click to expand...

I don't take offense. And I did not even know of the Latin meaning and modern use of the prefix "cis" until just now.

I did not take offense. Nor did I say anything to clearly indicate that I did. Yet, you have suggested that I did and even offered to use a different term....which seems an emotional thing to do rather than a logical thing....and now you might be starting to understand why I view you as arguing from emotion. and just as problematic, using evidence from and repeating the concepts promoted by people I also view as arguing from a more emotional collection of "reasons" than logical.

In fact, I am basically not in agreement with those who take offense at the term "cisgender". But I am so adaptive with vocabulary I literally want to create my own language. I already have my own alphabet and just take my word for it....its far superior to any alphabet you have ever heard of....except in one area....its not artistically pleasing. But my point is, superiority does not matter. "Better" does not matter. People are NOT very adaptable. That is why most Americans refuse metrics.... I mean its got serious problems....but good luck getting a metric opponent to identify just one. People are just not very adaptive. That is the biggest problem.

But its made word worse just by the sound of it. It sounds like "sissy", and in fact, that is how some people use it. You won't win over many masculine men by directing such a word at them. You may as well run your nails down a chalkboard while trying to convince them.

Next up, the term is trying to quantify normal people as equivalent to people who arent. A whole lot of other people are just not going to roll with that....at least not any time soon.

So.....my point? I am just being logical and trying to help you get things right and find a solution that will be fair and has a chance of working. When you assign some sort of personal motive to what I say, or nuance that is not there, it smacks of an emotional thinker.

My advice? Either drop the term cisgender or find a better sounding word. The better sounding word has a chance of being accepted because it won't trigger people to think deeply about it and say to themselves "Hey, wait a minute! This word puts me on the same scale of normal as trans people!"

Personally I am a bit dubious about it all because on the one hand, people should accept that people not being normal is okay....trans people are okay as far as being trans goes (ignorning side issues, such as toilet use). But people being emotional think their "normalness" makes them special, and boy do they ever feel the need to be special! (Not bragging, cause I don't brag, I just find it sad). On the other hand, I don't think normal needs a new word. But, I can't really see the harm. So....I am neutral.

But I think you aren't. So I help you. A new word might fly. Cisgender probably won't, whether you think its trolls being trolls or whatever. Its your choice. I am just telling you what I see on the road ahead.

This really could be so many discussions just like this one. Moebius loop.


If the above does not work it should be at the top of this search list.

• So you say that I shouldn't use the term cisgender (if I want to "win," whatever that means).
• I offer to accommodate you if the term bothers you (because that's how polite discourse works)
• You say it doesn't bother you, and that you disagree with people who are offended by it
• BUUUUT even though you just learned the actual meaning of the word, it does sound like "sissy," so maybe "masculine" men wouldn't like it (sounds like a real frail masculinity if it's threatened by a freaking homophone)
• "Next up" is the entire point of the coining of the term itself, to give a name to the supposed "default" or "normal" state. To quote Defosse, from the article you may or may not have read:

I was struggling because there did not seem to be a way to describe people who were not transgender without inescapably couching them in normalcy and making transgender identity automatically the "other."

Click to expand...

The discomfort of cisgender people as being described as such is an artifact of the self-centering mentality of the majority who define themselves as "just normal." this has been my point in a nutshell on the very topic of privileged groups. Even I had that reaction when I first encountered the word, and then I looked it up and understood what it meant, then I integrated it into my vocabulary. It's just become a polarizing word in the last few months because some people decided to make it their new culture war.

Master of Time said:

My advice? Either drop the term cisgender or find a better sounding word. The better sounding word has a chance of being accepted because it won't trigger people to think deeply about it and say to themselves "Hey, wait a minute! This word puts me on the same scale of normal as trans people!"

Personally I am a bit dubious about it all because on the one hand, people should accept that people not being normal is okay....trans people are okay as far as being trans goes (ignorning side issues, such as toilet use). But people being emotional think their "normalness" makes them special, and boy do they ever feel the need to be special! (Not bragging, cause I don't brag, I just find it sad). On the other hand, I don't think normal needs a new word. But, I can't really see the harm. So....I am neutral.

But I think you aren't. So I help you. A new word might fly. Cisgender probably won't, whether you think its trolls being trolls or whatever. Its your choice. I am just telling you what I see on the road ahead.

Click to expand...

So... you don't take offense, and don't mind the word, you just don't think I should use the word in case it offends someone hypothetical, and you're just trying to be a helpful, logical, neutral... devil's advocate?

I asked you to come up with a better term, and your answer is basically "yeah you'd better come up with another term." After boasting about how adaptive and great you are with words, inventing an entire new alphabet, and wanting to create a superior language of your own... you can't even give me one word.



Seems to me like "cisgender" is working just fine.

nice gaijin said:

After boasting about

Click to expand...

How many times must I repeat myself? I keep trying to tell you that I am just giving you information....you keep seeing emotional context that just isn't there.

nice gaijin said:

It's just become a polarizing word in the last few months because some people decided to make it their new culture war.

Click to expand...

Controversy over the word has existed for a decade at least. And I will have to be very clear here...I am not talking about my feelings...but a great many people don't like it..in fact...they find it offensive. Logically they shouldn't. But emotional thinkers are the human standard. Welcome to Earth.

And if you use a word for people that sounds like "sissy" that is concerning a topic as personal as their gender identity, well that will naturally lead to thoughts that this was chosen specifically to be an attack on that level, in the minds of the opposition, during a heated exchange about related matters.

Or do you expect people to, during a heated exchange, consult an online etymology dictionary, get the facts, and then immediately calm down? I sure don't.

nice gaijin said:

Seems to me like "cisgender" is working just fine.

Click to expand...

If the point is to enrage the maximum number of people and ensure a massive gain in enemies, I agree.

nice gaijin said:

you just don't think I should use the word in case it offends someone hypothetical,

Click to expand...

Elon Musk actually exists. And pay some attention to the lack of backlash against his pronouncement regarding the term "cisgender".

JK Rowling also exists. So does the author of this article.

nice gaijin said:

you can't even give me one word.

Click to expand...

Huh??? You asked me to provide a word in the case I was personally offended. I told you I was not personally offended. You never asked me to invent a better word for the world to use. I am tempted to explain why I think you would do such a thing, but it seems obvious that the more correct my estimation, the more denial I am going to face. So you evaluate your own behavior.

If you want a new word it could be duogender since it is representing the two genders that form a breeding pair in their typical/normal roles. I could see some confusion among people might take it as something like "double gendered" but I think a bit of such confusion is probably unavoidable. But, given a few days, I could come up with better maybe? At the very least, I cannot see immediate offense being sparked by duogender though, especially if the word "normal" is immediately attached to it, such as "You as a normal duogendered person don't have experience of this." However, they might say "Just call me female."....cause like I have said before, people are going to disagree with the concept if they think deeply about it. "Duogender" is less likely to trigger them to focus on the ins and outs of the concept.....the concept being that trans is on the spectrum of normal thus necessitating that normally gendered people have an equivalent term to transgender etc.

Master of Time said:

How many times must I repeat myself? I keep trying to tell you that I am just giving you information....you keep seeing emotional context that just isn't there.



Controversy over the word has existed for a decade at least. And I will have to be very clear here...I am not talking about my feelings...but a great many people don't like it..in fact...they find it offensive. Logically they shouldn't. But emotional thinkers are the human standard. Welcome to Earth.

And if you use a word for people that sounds like "sissy" that is concerning a topic as personal as their gender identity, well that will naturally lead to thoughts that this was chosen specifically to be an attack on that level, in the minds of the opposition, during a heated exchange about related matters.

Or do you expect people to, during a heated exchange, consult an online etymology dictionary, get the facts, and then immediately calm down? I sure don't.


If the point is to enrage the maximum number of people and ensure a massive gain in enemies, I agree.



Elon Musk actually exists. And pay some attention to the lack of backlash against his pronouncement regarding the term "cisgender".

JK Rowling also exists. So does the author of this article.

Opinion: The term ‘cisgender’ is more fraught than its advocates admit

Elon Musk thinks the term is a slur, and J.K. Rowling says it’s ‘ideological language,’ but the truth is more complicated

www.theglobeandmail.com

Huh??? You asked me to provide a word in the case I was personally offended. I told you I was not personally offended. You never asked me to invent a better word for the world to use. I am tempted to explain why I think you would do such a thing, but it seems obvious that the more correct my estimation, the more denial I am going to face. So you evaluate your own behavior.

If you want a new word it could be duogender since it is representing the two genders that form a breeding pair in their typical/normal roles. I could see some confusion among people might take it as something like "double gendered" but I think a bit of such confusion is probably unavoidable. But, given a few days, I could come up with better maybe? At the very least, I cannot see immediate offense being sparked by duogender though, especially if the word "normal" is immediately attached to it, such as "You as a normal duogendered person don't have experience of this." However, they might say "Just call me female."....cause like I have said before, people are going to disagree with the concept if they think deeply about it. "Duogender" is like likely to trigger them to focus on the ins and outs of the concept.

Click to expand...

Calling your little creation "far superior to any alphabet you have ever heard of" couldn't reasonably be considered boasting? I didn't realize I was talking to the King Sejong!


Duogender? That sounds like it describes gender fluidity... you seem to realize that this may exacerbate confusion... but hey at least it doesn't sound like a mean word? Even your definition is firmly seated in a binary that once again ignores the concepts we're describing here, the quote in my last post, and the very point of having a word to describe the assumed default without couching it in terms of normalcy..

If ANYONE in this thread had a problem with the term "cisgender," then we could have a discussion about it, but all you can do is warn me that some Musk fanboys might take offense? "Cis" != "sissy," full stop; that's a silly excuse. Perhaps someday the repeated attempts will succeed to sour its connotation and "cisgender" will fall out of use, as is the nature of language... but for now it's a practical and descriptive term, the only people I've heard complain about it are a few infamously transphobic whiny billionaires trying to make a case for censoring it. But like I said, Musk is totally cool with slurs about race, gender and sexuality, and even Rowling says at the end of her article that she describes herself as "cis" and will continue doing so... so what are you even doing?

nice gaijin said:

so what are you even doing?

Click to expand...

Trying to help you realize that some battles can be avoided yet you advocate ways that ensure they will be fought.

nice gaijin said:

Calling your little creation "far superior to any alphabet you have ever heard of" couldn't reasonably be considered boasting?

Click to expand...

It will seem far less like boasting if you take a second to realize just how garbage most alphabets are. In English, the letter C is pronounced either as S or K but has no sound of its own??? X is either Z or KS but no sound of its own? Why order letters from A to Z? Is there a purpose?

There are more consistent alphabets yes, but for the blind and the deaf entirely different alphabets are required, though mostly skipped in favor of signs for entire words.

Fact is, most alphabets came to be through a try and see process and few formally built from the ground up in consideration of what we know about phonetics, braille, sign language, electronics, etc. Mine took those into account. I am fairly certain that using my alphabet the blind could communicate directly with the deaf.

But once again, this is not evidence of my greatness. This is evidence of the fact that alphabets were made to scratch meanings onto paper and their limited scope made them limited..plus the other things I said.

But the real point is, I suggest you get over this idea that I am a boastful person. I am just not going to hide personal evidences and examples from you, hobbling the point I am trying to get across, all so you can hold some image of me being humble. What matters is the points and the ideas, their priniciples of fairness and truth. All the rest is but piles of feces to me. They distract. They waste time and energy and often prevent the best answers coming to the fore.

Best to remember this one small point of who you are talking to....I just want the best possible answers. I am trying to find them.....trying is the operative word here.

Getting back to cisgender, go ahead. Get the trans community "Targeted" like Bud Light. I don't really care. I just like the mental exercise and voicing my honest conclusions. Enjoy the results of your choices, cause I am done with a genuine care for the outcome.

As for duogender, I never really expected you to give it a chance. You seem to be adversarial just for the joy of the punching. But the layman still does not know the prefix "cis" beyond "cisgender", and I didn't either. They do have a concept of "duo" at least. If I mentioned a crime fighting duo, I am sure they would come up with Batman and Robin, but none of them think Batman actually IS Robin and they are a single person.....so they have a chance to get that duogendered means one of the two base genders. But, you know, this is not my preferred concept here. You are the one so enamored with it. I am fine with male, female, transgender, non-binary, etc. But hey, you are welcome.

Master of Time said:

Trying to help you realize that some battles can be avoided yet you advocate ways that ensure they will be fought.



It will seem far less like boasting if you take a second to realize just how garbage most alphabets are. In English, the letter C is pronounced either as S or K but has no sound of its own??? X is either Z or KS but no sound of its own? Why order letters from A to Z? Is there a purpose?

There are more consistent alphabets yes, but for the blind and the deaf entirely different alphabets are required, though mostly skipped in favor of signs for entire words.

Fact is, most alphabets came to be through a try and see process and few formally built from the ground up in consideration of what we know about phonetics, braille, sign language, electronics, etc. Mine took those into account. I am fairly certain that using my alphabet the blind could communicate directly with the deaf.

But once again, this is not evidence of my greatness. This is evidence of the fact that alphabets were made to scratch meanings onto paper and their limited scope made them limited..plus the other things I said.

But the real point is, I suggest you get over this idea that I am a boastful person. I am just not going to hide personal evidences and examples from you, hobbling the point I am trying to get across, all so you can hold some image of me being humble. What matters is the points and the ideas, their priniciples of fairness and truth. All the rest is but piles of feces to me. They distract. They waste time and energy and often prevent the best answers coming to the fore.

Getting back to cisgender, go ahead. Get the trans community "Targeted" like Bud Light. I don't really care. I just like the mental exercise and voicing my honest conclusions. Enjoy the results of your choices.

As for duogender, I never really expected you to give it a chance. You seem to be adversarial just for the joy of the punching. But the layman still does not know the prefix "cis" beyond "cisgender", and I didn't either. They do have a concept of "duo" at least. If I mentioned a crime fighting duo, I am sure they would come up with Batman and Robin, but none of them think Batman actually IS Robin and they are a single person.....so they have a chance to get that duogendered means one of the two base genders. But, you know, this is not my preferred concept here. You are the one so enamored with it. I am fine with male, female, transgender, non-binary, etc. But hey, you are welcome.

Click to expand...

OK dude, pick a fight to save me from a fight later on. Nitpick word choice so you can avoid addressing my actual points, yet manage to miss the entire reason a word exists and what it describes. Aim for the trees and still manage to miss the whole forest.

Master of Time said:

As for duogender, I never really expected you to give it a chance. You seem to be adversarial just for the joy of the punching. But the layman still does not know the prefix "cis" beyond "cisgender", and I didn't either. They do have a concept of "duo" at least. If I mentioned a crime fighting duo, I am sure they would come up with Batman and Robin, but none of them think Batman actually IS Robin and they are a single person.....so they have a chance to get that duogendered means one of the two base genders. But, you know, this is not my preferred concept here. You are the one so enamored with it. I am fine with male, female, transgender, non-binary, etc. But hey, you are welcome.

Click to expand...

you know what, maybe duo might catch on after all!

Ambiguously Gay Duo was comedy gold.

But its funny for reasons you don't want to get into with some people unless your goal is to set yourself back. Even they laugh without deeply understanding why. Bring that to the surface and now you face a leviathon.

But hey, like I say, its your call.

Not directly about cisgender but, I think the term is evoking a lot of the same sentiments.

Especially the comments can be helpful to see how and why and how many are in opposition. Four years old BTW.

Master of Time said:

A fine case of human delusion and victim mentality you have found there. A couple of meth users rob and beat another meth user and its just got to be cause of sexual orientation....rather than money or his drug stash.

Its impossible to be 100 percent sure of motives in the best of cases, but that one is a complete mess......so whatever bias a person wants to employ is easy.

The killers are consistent about saying it was a robbery gone haywire. In typical fashion, the victim's gayness was just used to lure him....a tool...not a motive. It seems they did attempt to use the "gay panic defense" in court Naturally people will stick with that because its what they want to see.

It seems one of the killers, McKinney, was gay or bi-sexual, according one Tom O'Connor who knows him.

People just let their bias be their guide and decide things were whatever suits their fancy. That a hate crime law is stupidly based on this case is no surprise to me. This is one of the reasons I hate humanity.....they are so damned random, presumptive and careless. There are many examples of extreme action taken over what is not even a good guess.

This reminds me of the case from yesterday where the sleeping gaijin chef has a knife and it leads to mass panic. Humanity is a pulsating mass of presumption and stupidity, seeing what they want to see, outrageously delusional, hating of facts and simple truths, intellectually lazy, etc. etc.

New Details Emerge in Matthew Shepard Murder

abcnews.go.com

So anyway, who kills gay guys? Well mostly its gay guys. Just like its mostly White guys that kill White guys and Black guys that kill Black guys and I suppose hetero guys that kill hetero guys.....just like most murders are in the family and not strangers. But "stranger danger" is more appealing to human delusion so that myth just rolls on and on. Same with this myth that gays are in terrible danger from heteros.

Most of these gay/bi killers in the following link were targetting other gay/bi men. No surprise. If anything, it was "awareness" that got men dead. Looks like Grindr came in handy more than once. KGOV's List of Gay Mass Murderers | KGOV.com

Click to expand...

I suppose that if you want to rob somebody, you don't have to kick him/her until death. To do that, it means you really hate that person.

Btw, police brutality is a fact so it definitely is Caucasian ppl who kick / kill Afro ppl.

As for you other example, if you go on Tinder or whatever sex app to find gay men, it's because you want to reach them so if you decide to beat them up, it's because you're homophobic since you wouldn't do that to straight guys... And when I say "you", it's very generic.

Master of Time said:

That is exactly right. And getting back to the actual topic here, there are plenty of them in the LGBT community as well, wanting far more power than they ever deserved and being belligerent irrational bullies to try and get it. All those types have to go...by peaceful means...by violent means...I don't care. We can't afford to have these types running around anymore, esp in government. Old style wars have been bad enough, but nukes, AI and drones means the next world war that these types are liable to cause is going to spell the end of humanity and all life on Earth.

To be clear I am not really against the LGBT+ community itself, but they are going to just have to accept the fact that they are an extreme minority, always will be, and due to that alone they will be misunderstood and face a degree of discrimination because of all that, and stop assuming its just raw hatred driving everything....it isn't. Those with deep raw hatred of the LGBT+ community are ALSO an extreme minority.

But the LGBT+ community is making ever more progress in power and recognition and the alpha bullies in the group are floating to the top as it goes on. We have had much the same with the feminists. Hell, we had much the same with NATO. Their original goals were satisfied but those who took the leadership roles just would not let go of the power they had amassed and so they pushed for ever more power and goals and just became dangerous pests.

So far my biggest annoyance with LGBT+ is stuff like this...wasting government time on vague laws, bills and discussions about "promotion of understanding"...which sounds more like a plea for everyone to just believe whatever dogma they are told to believe.

I don't care that they are around privately enjoying their private lives, but it seems the goal now is to go public with things even straight people hide plus the things that make the vast majority uncomfortable and always will.

The only sanity I see is a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy where people just mind their own business (the general concept of which I think we both agree on). That would mean things like marriage would cease to become a matter of public record.....you just have a register of people who can do things like handle your will, visit you in the hospital, are related to your tax filings ect. and no one has to know if its a marriage, a civil union, a non famililia but brotherly or sisterly relationship or whatever. Who is probably bonking who is not necessary information.

Well, I think I will stop this hodge podge post here and just say that what really matters is us avoiding armageddon, even if I cannot deny I do harbor a wish for it given reasons like the simple fact people won't or can't focus on that simple and vital current priority.

Click to expand...

According to wikipedia, 63% of the population is exclusively straight.
According to constantreader, 58% of the population is transgender(ed).

And, I should remind everyone that being gay & being transgender are 2 different things.

Just so everyone knows where Sydney Watson's confident-yet-totally-confused, "sorry, not sorry" presentation is coming from


@chrys_oniisan, welcome back to the forum. Before you get too invested in this topic I must warn you that it's been beaten already quite severely.