|
Xoidanor posted:Comedy and political commentary both sustain themselves on controversy so it should be no surprise Oliver takes every opportunity to delightfully shake the hornets nest. The best part is that he not only does so, but that on learning he's actually gotten their attention, he doesn't back down (and even admits when they do right). Instead, well... 
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 13:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:20 |
|
|
If anyone's hankering for some contextualised history stuff, I recommend the world history series done by PBS and John Green. Its a little simplified, but it covers a wide range of stuff one will probably never hear about in a classroom. I'm actually curious how John's background affects his particular understanding of the United States and its history. Ie, how he might understand aspects of the cukture but still disagree due to where he came from, and alternatively vastly appreciates aspects that others take for granted (such as how wide and diverse it is both culturally and geographically).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
IRQ posted:You probably shouldn't say that to someone from the UK. Such as... myself? But, I do suppose you have a point. I wasn't trying to say that the UK isn't itself fairly diverse, but its all mainly within one climate zone, compared to a country that has deserts, rainforests, vast plains, etc, with all the differences of local custom and thought that such implies. Edit: And yes, Xibanya, you should. Its pretty interesting to look through how the Radical Republicans slowly shifted in how they treated the former Confederate states after the war, and how that's consequently affected people's views and social circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:John Green is a writer of those scholcky teen movies (Fault In Our Stars), I'm pretty sure he's working with his old high school history teacher and probably a few more consultants now if it's on PBS. Yeah, apologies for the shorthand. Wasn't sure if to call him the presenter or narrator or such, but yeah, the scripts and research are generally handled by staff.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
The other thing to consider, at least in why some people just don't seem to understand the concept of gender outside the binary, and how it doesn't always align with biological sex, is that its a concept that doesn't apply in most people's lives, and indeed has scarcely been a concept for most of human history. The vast majority of stories and ideas that lean on transgenderism do so from a binary perspective, which further muddies how people might try to understand (ie, a girl behaving more like a boy is framed as them being a tomboy, or simply behaving like a boy, not that the 'girl' identifies as a boy). It's not necessarily malicious, but it does leave a lot of people ill prepared, made worse by the fact that - by its nature - transgenderism has a relatively loose 'community', with a very wide arrange of differing concepts, terms, and understandings, and those who are malicious towards transgender individuals will exploit that. Personally, I only really gained a gradual understanding because I'm part of a very net-exposed generation, and I've actually known transgender people (both viewing it from the 'I am currently A, but intend to transition into and become B' perspective), so I've had incentive to try and understand. Prior to that, I don't think I even knew the term till I was, what, fifteen? It just simply hadn't seemed relevant beforehand, and so I was absolutely ignorant of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:I saw a Nova episode or TV documentary or something about intersex children and gender assignment in the early 80s when I was still a little kid myself, as well as more biased/sensationalized but also more visible Donahue, Sally Jesse, etc. day time talk show episodes with transgendered guests. So it is completely possible for an older person who is not part of the internet generation or queer activism to have a long -- even life long -- acquaintance with trans issues. Granted both the science and politics have evolved since the early 80s and that hasn't always been well-publicized. Fair deuce, and apologies if I implied otherwise. I was thinking more in the sense that the internet both made the subject matter relatively more visible to me (ie, sites like tumblr), but also easier to try and find information on it, since really very little came up in the media I consumed and the education I had.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:Definitions There can be some overlap and debate at times, whilst the terms themselves can be somewhat broad. Intersex, at the broadest understanding (that I'm aware of anyway) roughly means that a person is in some way between being a 'default' male or female (which as mentioned above, is itself under increased scrutiny), whether its a matter of visible genitalia differences, or hormonal differences derived from extra chromosomes whilst externally a clear sex, etc. Transgender, as you say, broadly refers to somehow who does not identify with the gender identity given to them at birth, but, many will validate or consider their perspective in terms of an intersex framework. Fairly understandable that some feel, on finding that they do not clearly align with a single sex, that their identity must lie outside that boundary. But others may feel that way simply because of the social constructs and expectations found in either gender identity, rather than because of the dissonance with a textbook understanding of their chemistry. Often transgender is used as a shorthand to cover intersex persons as well (ie, outside the normal sex/gender boundaries, ironically conflating sex and gender), though as you might have guessed, some aren't too happy about that. Hence its suggested (and in many circles, already decided) that the abbreviation 'LGBT' should be expanded to be 'LGBTI' (and that's before you add in a Q for Queer).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:I like that, especially for academic and institutional use since it captures the populations that actually need protection without forcing anyone to define themselves in minute detail. That and its also a word that has potential, original context readings and usage too (ie, still used to simply mean 'strange'). Using something abbreviated at least allows one to be specific, whilst something like GSM is also broad enough to cover a wide and fairly loose collection of differing definitions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
So I imagine when John gets back, this has to get at least some mention. Otherwise though, the issue regarding lawyers not being quite so affordable as they're meant to be is unfortunately true across the pond. One MP went through the court system and was flatout shocked that you actually had to pay for your lawyers, rather than them being provided for free. Which is also why so many 'No Win No Fee' agencies have cropped up over the last decade - because people often don't have a lot of choice and will gladly give up part of their settlements if it means someone defending them, and even then a lot of those agencies are injury focused.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Part of it, aside of perception (particularly of the short term consequences), is the timing, though in turn perception or what the timing means. A lot of nations in Europe are still struggling financially because of the crunch, and so the idea of governments being called on to shelter potentially hundreds of thousands of people when theyre struggling to care for their own populations really pisses off nationalists and the like. Of course, there is a difference between 'out of work and the welfare doesn't go far enough' and 'literally fleeing a warzone'. Germany's sympathies in this regard end up kinda obvious once you realise most people of working age - especially Merkel - has living memory of not dissimilar experience.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
Laverna posted:You're right, the Native Americans were pretty welcoming at first, weren't they? Don't you guys have a whole holiday based around that? This feels relevant: 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
MVP posted:Is there any evidence that shows like Jon Stewart, Colbert, and Oliver actually get anything done in terms of political reform? This is something that Stewart himself mocked at the end of his tenure, so... The most famous example is probably the 9/11 First Responders issue, where Stewart's spotlight on the issue is cited by many involved as having spurred people - especially Fox News - on enough to actually get something done. That is however more the exception than the rule.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:20 |
|
|
So I'm a little confused - why is Fantasy Football illegal if it were gambling? Just because they didn't apply for a proper license (in which case, why don't they), or because its gambling on sports specifically? I apologise if that should seem obvious, but when my country has companies going by the name of 'Betfred', that the US companies should be playing sheepish is kind of... baffling.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 14:55
|
|