Co-signed. (More giant roll-eyes than “anger” from me, but, in principle, the same.)
My hostility isn’t towards transgender people, it’s towards the idea that we should normalise cisgender people with cisgender names and appearances listing their pronouns in e-mails/social media etc.
It’s also not relevant to this thread.
Again, this is missing that the bile from the OP is directed at conservatives if they are committed to anti-intellectualism and deliberately undermining good faith discussion. Of course, even I do take also into account how many times the OP in the past can’t leave his Sherwin Williams wide brushes alone.
We absolutely do need conservatives, both here on the board and in society as a whole. The problem is that there are precious few of them left. Democrats have been trying to fill the gap, but let’s face it, we suck at being conservative, and we can’t manage to be both conservative and liberal at the same time.
Let’s get some actual conservatives back, so Democrats can go back to being liberal, and we can have two political groups in this country again, instead of a sane group and an insane group.
WHY do you have a problem with normalizing cisgendered people listing their pronouns? WHAT bothers you so much about that?
I don’t think we have many, if any, people here who agree with whatever Trump or Hannity says. It rather seems to be the problem that agreeing with anything one of them says, even unknowingly, gets you branded as a conservative. Calling someone right-wing has almost become more of an insult than a description of a policy position.
Missed this the first time. Love this post! When I first started arguing on the internet I was immature and tried to fix everybody else’s ignorance. Now I realize that I should mostly be fixing my own.
I’m not derailing this thread to be called names over something it’s pretty clear you don’t actually genuinely want to understand my position on, or if you do want to understand it, it’s to call me names.
Many do think that. That’s exactly the problem.
I’d say that, among the problems facing America, that many Democrats do in fact manage to be both liberal and conservative at the same time, to the point of participating in the vilification of their own progressive (dare I say, leftist?) wing. The problem, to be clear, is the absence of a viable left. We’ve got centrist, and we’ve got the right.
I disagree. Perhaps I am wrong but asahi’s posts regularly paint all conservatives as evil. Do you think he can name a single Republican who he likes?
+1
It was interesting to see the thread about how people came to accept that being gay was okay. Many posters here have changed their views in the past, yet somehow they cannot imagine that they could be wrong or ill-informed about something in the present?
When about 1/2 the population is conservative, it’s beneficial to understand their viewpoints even if the discussions can be frustrating. We all live in the real world with real issues that need to be decided. If we just have one viewpoint here, then it’s easy to think of solutions to make one side happy but ultimately are unworkable.
For example, healthcare is very divisive. The left would like universal healthcare, and would like it to include things like birth control and abortions. However, the right doesn’t want those things. In fact, they dislike them so much that they would tear down universal healthcare if those coverages were included. What is more workable is to understand both viewpoints and come up with something that each side can live with. Certainly each side wants the solution to reflect 100% of its own goals, but that’s not the world we live in. If the other side is sufficiently upset, then they will mobilize and create their own solution. The key is to find something that both sides can live with. If we only hear one side’s viewpoint, then we can’t come up with workable solutions.
Got it, so name-calling is only OK when you do it to transgender people, I get it
Way to project. Maybe if you presented some compelling evidence rather than the same transphobic claptrap everyone has already heard before, you’d get better results.
But no, I’m sure you’re right, and in a few years you’ll post a thread titled “when did you realize that trans women are actually just men who want to violently attack women in bathrooms?” And we’ll all come crying back to you then.
Do you deny that he put that “If” in his OP?
Despite the rancor, I don’t think there’s actually much disagreement in this thread. I think everyone broadly agrees that fact is fact, and that if someone joins the Dope and is posting nonsense like 9/11 Trutherism or Flat-Earth, that person isn’t contributing anything - is simply wasting everyone’s time, and brings no benefit. (I’m not necessarily saying such people should be banned, just saying that they are absolutely no use or benefit to the board.)
The concern, though, is that some Dopers have a tough time separating objective fact from subjective opinion, and consider the latter to be the former. And there have also been times when the admins have set boundaries that exclude legit and reasonable debate (such as the rule of “no men’s rights threads permitted; they’re a thrice-told tale” when in fact there are some aspects - I stress, some - of the men’s rights movement that do in fact have some legitimacy to it.)
And many like to use the passive voice to accuse some nebulous number of people of something, and not need to actually point out any examples, to which they would be shown that they are misrepresenting them.
“Many people are saying” is certainly a conservative rallying cry that I wouldn’t mind no longer seeing on this board.
Yup. People (and worse the media) are too prone to claiming something is ‘debunked’ and wanting to end the debate when in fact it is no such thing. See the lab leak theory for an example.
Oy. We can argue about our interpretation of a single word in one post among thousands or we can examine the general tenor of the posts. Do you deny that he thinks all conservatives are evil, or at least regularly expresses that opinion?