|
thespaceinvader posted:There's a big difference between 'not self-evidently correct' and 'not settled' though - germ theory is pretty settled, but you still have to actually learn how it works and trust the science done before to figure it out. I don't think scientism is really a helpful approach to what is essentially a philosophical and ideological argument though. A German scientist in the 1930s could have found some hypothetical irrefutable proof that Nazi racial policy was bunk, but it wouldn't have mattered because it was never really about science. Similarly, TERFs could not give a gently caress what the science says unless it supports their agenda.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 01:41 |
|
|
The real problem with free speech absolutism, I have come to believe, is that people don't shut up and accept it once an argument is actually settled. Like, okay fine, the first time a topic like "How do trans women fit into women's sports?" comes up is a reasonable thing to discuss because we frankly didn't know the answers, and we needed both scientific and philosophical work to come to a conclusion. But now we have done that and we have the answers. The debate is over. But these cunts keep coming out with it like it's a novel and entirely new point that must be met with the exact same degree of respect and seriousness as the first go around. And then someone will do it again and again and again. Free speech absolutism as long as your ideas are genuinely original. e; to what ThomasPaine said, let people who are actually questioning and exploring their gender have the deep interrogations of their gender. I'm very ready to talk with trans people about trans stuff, and I'm very ready to talk about it with actual well-intentioned cis people, because those have the potential to be useful discussions. I don't need to talk about it with some numpty who has no concept of the issues involved and thinks "Haha attack helicopter" is a cutting criticism Ms Adequate fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Nov 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:It does seem weird how much people really dislike wanting to change anything about themselves, doesn't everyone want to try and be different and at least a bit better every day? no Ms Adequate posted:The real problem with free speech absolutism, I have come to believe, is that people don't shut up and accept it once an argument is actually settled. Like, okay fine, the first time a topic like "How do trans women fit into women's sports?" comes up is a reasonable thing to discuss because we frankly didn't know the answers, and we needed both scientific and philosophical work to come to a conclusion. its even more insidious when you realise anti-trans arguments are the thin end of a wedge that is being used to bring back homophobic laws and rhetoric, anti-trans arguments are barely seperable from anti-gay ones Ash Crimson fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Nov 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:46
|
|
|
The thought is in my head that means it must be very clever and one nobody else has had. Why yes I am paid to write things, how did you guess?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:47
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:It does seem weird how much people really dislike wanting to change anything about themselves, doesn't everyone want to try and be different and at least a bit better every day? I've fallen out with/no longer talk to a few people over the years because I've changed and they've refused to do so, being stuck age 20 listening to Less Than Jake* for eternity sure must just simply be worth it for some. (*There is nothing wrong with Less Than Jake, if that's your thing!**) (**There might be and I just don't know about it) TRIXNET fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Nov 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I don't think scientism is really a helpful approach to what is essentially a philosophical and ideological argument though. A German scientist in the 1930s could have found some hypothetical irrefutable proof that Nazi racial policy was bunk, but it wouldn't have mattered because it was never really about science. Similarly, TERFs could not give a gently caress what the science says unless it supports their agenda. You say that like they are going to be persuaded by philosophy though? Because they're not. They're not going to be persuaded *at all*. Because their views aren't based in any kind of logic or rationality - if they were persuadable by logic or rationality, from science or philosphy, they woudl already be persuaded, because as noted, both the science and the philosophy are pretty loving persuasive. Terves won't go away by arguing science or philosophy with them, they will go away by normalising transness and non-binary gender and kids having puberty blockers and etc etc etc in wider society to the point where their bigotry is no longer a point of "legitimate debate" and instead a point of derision or ridicule. Terves won't be persuaded by facts and logic, they will be persuaded by their views becoming socially unacceptable. I'm not saying we shouldn't keep debating the nuance, or having nuanced internal discussions, but we need, as a society, to present a united front against bigotry, and not tolerate it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:e; to what ThomasPaine said, let people who are actually questioning and exploring their gender have the deep interrogations of their gender. I'm very ready to talk with trans people about trans stuff, and I'm very ready to talk about it with actual well-intentioned cis people, because those have the potential to be useful discussions. I don't need to talk about it with some numpty who has no concept of the issues involved and thinks "Haha attack helicopter" is a cutting criticism That's essentially what I'm saying, when you boil it down. I agree there's never any point engaging with bad faith actors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:52
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:You say that like they are going to be persuaded by philosophy though? going back in time to corrupt hitler with /eggirl memes and make them super leftist, inadvertantly creating a new roman empire according to red alert logic
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
Suzanne Moore was one of those complacent, comfortably situated, older Guardian writers who'd spent years penning earnest thinkpieces about the need for radical change, only to do a screeching u-turn the moment somebody arrived on the scene who might actually do that stuff. She was also one of the crew who leapt on the antisemitism allegations with visible, frantic relief: cue a number of articles where she explained that, while she totally, definitely wanted better things to happen, her tender conscience just could not allow her to support a man with such a cloud hanging over him etc etc. God, I despise the complacent old Boomer clique at the Guardian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Free speech absolutism as long as your ideas are genuinely original. thespaceinvader posted:I'm not saying we shouldn't keep debating the nuance
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:You say that like they are going to be persuaded by philosophy though? Of course not, but this is going back two the two strands I discussed earlier. You're not going to win over the true believer TERFs because they are bad faith actors and it's not about genuine engagement for them. it's about denying rights to transpeople. There are however non TERFs who are looking to engage with these issues in good faith even where they may have some areas of philosophical disagreement or uncertainty on how to understand gender, but all the while acknowledge that no matter what trans people should be free to live without bigotry and harassment. My point is basically that those latter people should be engaged with in good faith and we should encourage discussion there without condemnation, while TERFs should get the wall. My original point was mostly that it's very difficult to do this because TERFs have muddied the water here so badly and transpeople + allies are, with very good reason, very defensive. Maybe I could have been clearer. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Nov 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Thank you Therattle for proving my theory, telling people to gently caress off is better at radicalising people than sincere engagement. In my case, despite not because. Someone a few pages ago wrote how the hostility in this thread could drive away anyone with different views, rather than allowing them to become more educated. I was motivated to read up on the issue more because of people who engaged earnestly than people saying “gently caress off, oval office”. Unsurprisingly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
That makes more sense. I'm happy to educate, and entertain uncertainty and questions. I'm not happy to debatethe basic validity of trans and non binary people. I think on both things, we probably agree.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:It does seem weird how much people really dislike wanting to change anything about themselves, doesn't everyone want to try and be different and at least a bit better every day? No, many people do not want to change or improve. If you don't very strongly value self improvement for its own sake or are used to external stimulation that requires you to self improve, self improvement is merely a particularly uncomfortable and tedious additional task in your (probably already lovely and busy) life and you'll get defensive at anyone who says you should do it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:08
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Lol Suzanne Moore stood against Dianne Abbott and got slaughtered. She's always been scum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Yeah this. lmao that JKR letter where it was just the same dozen terf talking points in a different order and everyone in the press was acting like it was the loving Principia of good arguments. In fairness to her I have never before seen a single article that could fill out every single square of terf bingo, it's definitely the Principia Transphobica if nothing else
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
therattle posted:In my case, despite not because. Someone a few pages ago wrote how the hostility in this thread could drive away anyone with different views, rather than allowing them to become more educated. I was motivated to read up on the issue more because of people who engaged earnestly than people saying “gently caress off, oval office”. Unsurprisingly. Wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:That makes more sense. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
I think philosophy can be useful but mostly if you don't present it like philosophy because gently caress me I hate reading philosophy. But like, if you can get people to think about stuff in a way that is more useful to them they'll be more likely to want to pursue it further.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
therattle posted:I don't mean to open up an old argument but I have now gone and read most of the leaked Labour report into AS. I had read bits of it, and read about it, but not put in the time to read most of it. (I had work and childcare). I hope you learn from this and the next time you're getting torn to loving shreds on something and being told that you're flat out wrong by reasonable people, you will consider that those people could be right. Just want to address something else from this post though, re: Competence. I know you're talking about the GLU but I want to make a more general point. Who would you rather have leading the country, somebody who is "highly competent" but malicious, or somebody who is "incompetent" but has good principles and actually cares about the people they're supposed to be protecting? Between somebody is actually trying to do the right thing but gets it wrong once in a while, and somebody who is trying to do the wrong thing and is really good at it, which is going to give the better outcomes for people? "Competent" is just a word that gets thrown around by Tories. There is no loving meaning to it anymore. It's a word used to try to paint somebody as good or bad - there is no actual meaning to it anymore. It's like "Electable". Who decides if somebody is electable? The Tories try to push that they're "competent on the economy" or whatever but any time they're in power they look like anything but, and you're pushed into the whole "Competence vs Malice" thing, and yes, you're not supposed to ascribe anything which you can ascribe to incompetence, to malice, but I think that's bullshit. It's a good enough rule most of the time for personal or professional relationships but for governments, governments who keep doing and voting for things that *can without hyperbole be described as evil*, over and over and over again, you can no longer call it incompetence. Besides, how much "competence" is required, actually, to be a politician? Most of the actual doing of stuff is done by the civil service, no? Is Johnson "competent"? How about Javid? Gove? Williamson? Patel? May? Cameron? Any Tory at all? I don't see that you could argue that any of those cunts are. All of them have tried to push out policy and had to U-turn, again and again. It's cemented into the British public id that the Tories are "competent on the economy" so you will never, ever win a battle in the public mind by pushing "competence". In reality most Tories are both malicious *and* incompetent. If you want change in the UK stop framing things in terms of "competence" and start framing them in terms of principles - we did that and it almost worked. It almost worked in 2017 *even with the entire loving might of capital and the media against us*. Unfortunately for the likes of Starmer to push on principles you actually have to *have* principles which you aren't willing to sell out to rich donors and the right-wing presses. And that's why he's pushing "competence" so much. Don't buy into it, it's a meaningless dead end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:14
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:That makes more sense. Yep. I have found the discussion the last few pages about trans rights and the debate around it really illuminating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
The future is now  https://twitter.com/hypatiadotca/status/1328326389611819011?s=20
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:24
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:In fairness to her I have never before seen a single article that could fill out every single square of terf bingo, it's definitely the Principia Transphobica if nothing else Like "I wonder if her next point will be origin... oh look it's the ROGD conspiracy theory study" as if it was deliberately written to be as infuriating and mentally draining as possible. On the plus side it did make an easy format to allow multiple very good takedowns but I can't find those so have this instead: https://twitter.com/naranciagaming/status/1328000091362369536
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:as if it was deliberately written to be as infuriating and mentally draining as possible. But enough about her published novels ha ha ha
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
CGI Stardust posted:i'm no expert on racism, but, well, isn't this a bit iffy, and posted by him only a few hours ago What a bizarre world these people live in, where Owen Jones is the most powerful person in the country.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
The entire liberal media class collectively making GBS threads its pants over being cancelled for having lovely opinions and screeching about free speech has been one of the funnier things this year to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
therattle posted:
that was my take away too, when the report came out i remember i was so careful because as the telegraph definition of a corbynite i knew i wanted to beleive in the sabotage. and yes leaking its an act of sabotage itself, as its basically a lot of biased whinging but the stuff they're whinging about it genuinely shocking. its essentially a distress signal from the new left within the party that briefly illuminates the actual party structure and its a horror show in there. it pisses me off because its probably the only assertive thing the left actually did against the party and it was as a passive aggressive sting in the tail. if it was like this... you shoiuld have said so sooner! it should have been a key loving plank of your communications to members and you should have made a public effort to force them out. call a conference and vote the bastards out. instead there was no realistic plan for unification but also no plan to remove or run around them, but the comms to members were "dont worry this is fine! we got this its just all about the election! then if we win ?????? we'll figure it out!". when he won the leadership i thought at the very least starmer might come in and clean house, if half the stuff in that report is true the labour party just isnt functional as an organisation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
Noxville posted:What a bizarre world these people live in, where Owen Jones is the most powerful person in the country. Dude won't kayfabe, the worst sin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:that was my take away too, when the report came out i remember i was so careful because as the telegraph definition of a corbynite i knew i wanted to beleive in the sabotage. I found it deeply depressing, and as you say, genuinely shocking. I used the term "almost inconceivable", because the degree of vituperation is almost inconceivable. Earlier when I was arguing someone asked what more could Corbyn have done, believing that there was nothing more. He could have made it clear that disciplinary matters are not his issue: it's McNicol's responsibility. Put some heat on McNicols, very publicly, to sort it out. Make clear the distinction between leader and general secretary, and who is responsible for what. Publicly demand answers to why there are these delays. Some might say that it would have damaged the party (and perhaps that's why he didn't), but no more (and almost certainly less) than the ongoing rumble around AS that was allowed to continue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:, if half the stuff in that report is true the labour party just isnt functional as an organisation. It's functional as an organisation for what it's for - keeping power out of the hands of the people and in the hands of the establishment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Noxville posted:What a bizarre world these people live in, where Owen Jones is the most powerful person in the country. The power of right wing propaganda right there in the comments. A bunch of people that know absolutely nothing about politics and economics but find it so very funny to go 'state owned! LMAO!' because they have been programmed to associate nationalised industry with bad and inefficient. The way the world is right now, this is the only way it could ever be. If we changed anything it would all collapse, we'd have pandemics and hospitals filling up and all kinds of crazy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
Mebh posted:The entire liberal media class collectively making GBS threads its pants over being cancelled for having lovely opinions and screeching about free speech has been one of the funnier things this year to be honest. It’s funniest when you boil it down to what most of them actually mean by “cancelled” and it’s just randoms being rude to them on Twitter. Freedom of expression is important as long as it’s my freedom of expression in a national newspaper and the plebs aren’t free to express any opinions back.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:No, many people do not want to change or improve. But why? People can't surely think that today being the same as yesterday and the same as tomorrow is a good thing, and we only really have control over ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
This conspiracy theory titled article is very good. I'm sure I remember some vague reasons why the author isn't, but the end reasoning is extremely Correct. The TRUTH about Article 61 of Magna Carta Specifically this bit: quote:There is, however, a serious point to be made about the various claims made about ancient legal documents, such as Magna Carta or the Bill of Rights.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:But why? People can't surely think that today being the same as yesterday and the same as tomorrow is a good thing, and we only really have control over ourselves. I mean, that is sort of my idea of paradise for the most part, a state where everyone is well and safe and the only external impositions are things like days, tides, seasons, rain or sun, and it is up to us to create new things to keep things as interesting as we want it to be. The imposition of change upon you by external necessity is unpleasant for a lot of people, even you find it uncomfortable to do self examination, no? Well some people can just opt out of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:But why? People can't surely think that today being the same as yesterday and the same as tomorrow is a good thing, and we only really have control over ourselves. People mostly don't think as deeply as you do Bugman. Sadly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:12
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:But why? People can't surely think that today being the same as yesterday and the same as tomorrow is a good thing, and we only really have control over ourselves. It takes some reflection to realise that you're in bad enough shape to need to change, and to accept you're the main person responsible for your condition. Changing yourself then takes loads more effort, whether that's a habit of greeting or a beer belly. Most people don't have the space in their lives for all that hard work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:22
|
|
|
peanut- posted:It’s funniest when you boil it down to what most of them actually mean by “cancelled” and it’s just randoms being rude to them on Twitter. Freedom of expression is important as long as it’s my freedom of expression in a national newspaper and the plebs aren’t free to express any opinions back. Yeah cancel culture is just the fact people can tell opinion writers their opinions suck poo poo. Something that never happened previously cos it required letters to the editor so they went in the bin And telling journalists they're scum is very cathartic imo
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:It does seem weird how much people really dislike wanting to change anything about themselves, doesn't everyone want to try and be different and at least a bit better every day? Speaking from my own experience of life to date it seems like there are many more people who take the attitude that they cannot possibly be wrong, ever, and if you have a problem with that you can enjoy picking up your teeth from your local asdurs car park 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 01:41 |
|
|
Everyone should bully the people who write in the British press. I won't say journalists because these slime aren't journalists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 21:31
|
|