In response to recent concerns...

Violetsmile · 5 days

A statement which reduces to nothing more than "reddit doesn't like you" is only compelling inasmuch as you place any actual value in reddit's collective opinion. Which is one hell of an assumption.

Love,

SilentAgony's trans partner

abplafcan · 11 days

In 2002 at 13 - and now.

Maso8299 · 17 days

humor is an invaluable weapon against the uglier parts of life. You have to be able to laugh at things that some would recoil in horror at.

Yes, it enables people to treat the topic with less seriousness than it deserves, and thus fail to do anything about it.

Oh, wait. This is a HORRIBLE idea.

greenduch · 24 days

My partner and I. She has the short hair :)

raks1991 · 24 days

You couldn't replace the demand of the jewellery industry with tools.

Insofar as the demand for diamonds was created wholly artificially, yeah you could. Theoretically you could replace it with anything. Tools could come to represent everything that diamonds currently do, given the right marketing angle.

raks1991 · 24 days

If they'd let the price of diamonds collapse, all diamonds would become worth very little. Who would be better off? The poor schmos who had bought diamonds only to see them become rocks? The companies that collapsed? You, for having a few more pretty stones to throw? The employees who get fired? The potential knock on effect of a lucrative market crashing?

So you think we ought to create an absurdly high value for practically useless objects as some kind of jobs program?

jsb9r3 · 26 days

Your favorite sign is a straw man.

I suspect your claims of a straw man are themselves a straw man. Sure, you can say that abortion opponents believe a fertilized egg is a human being, but a sperm cell in isolation isn't - and you'd be right. But it's obvious that the bearer of this sign is not in agreement with this particular moral theory. Just because abortion opponents think some incredibly significant moral difference exists between a sperm cell and a fertilized egg, that doesn't mean that the person with the sign shares this view or is at all disposed to indulge that assumption. They may very well not think there's all that much difference, in an ethical sense and in the context of reproductive rights, between sperm cells and fertilized eggs. They may not think that the physical differences merit treating the moment of fertilization as a sacrosanct boundary where a morally significant entity comes into being. And this is what they're expressing with their sign that suggests the differences are pretty much negligible in a moral sense.

Basically, their sign isn't there to say "We Agree With You, Abortion Opponents! A Fertilized Egg IS a Person!" It explicitly disregards this moral claim of the anti-abortion side. That was the point: they disagree with this!

JasonMacker · 26 days

It makes me angry because it takes the idea that all men are rapists and paints it broadly across the entire subject of rape prevention.

Where did it say anything about men at all, let alone "all men are rapists"?

What I mean by this, is that it puts all the pressure on the actions of the perpetrator. That's great, but

Sorry, no, there doesn't need to be a "but" there. It all comes down to the actions of the perpetrator, as they are the reason that rape occurs. A victim could do everything "right" by your ignorant, ridiculous, unrealistic expectations and still be raped. But if no one ever decided to rape anyone, there would be no rape at all. It's not a victim's job not to get raped. It's a would-be rapist's job not to rape people. And you really think it would be somehow better to make victims think they were raped because of something they did, rather than the fact that a horrible person decided to rape them? I humbly suggest you shut the fuck up about how "angry" this makes you, because jesus fucking christ.

mepper · 27 days

If you start arresting people who go to confessionals, then people will stop going to them and confessing to these crimes.

Well, so what? Why do you ascribe any particular value to maximizing the number of confessions to crimes, if you never want those confessions to be acted upon and want nothing to come of them?

Perhaps it's better to have a place where they can confess to their crime and have the priest convince them that it's wrong so that they don't do it again.

Is there any evidence that such an effect exists?

anutensil · 1 month

Can you prove this?

anutensil · 1 month

State-issued IDs cost money to obtain. If this is a requirement for voting, then at the very least, these should be issued free of charge. Arguably, if this is going to be made a requirement, the state should be required to make valid ID available to anyone who needs one.

trot-trot · 1 month

I also support Temple in this. If you can't make payments on your car or house, do you get to keep it? Nope.

Yet their having received the education - the very substance of the degree - remains a fact. Why would anyone think that can be taken away in the same way a car or house would be? It's fundamentally not the same thing.

daftdaftdaft · 1 month

I also don't think you realize it, but you're validating the people who criticize the "gay agenda", by showing them you do want a world where everything that is said or written down must pass through a strict filter that only applies to certain people.

We should put you in charge so you can use the beliefs of homophobes as your guide for how to run things.

It's because their ancestors had to deal with a lot more. While the LGBTQ community fights for lower taxes and health benefits, African Americans fought for to right to not be treated as property, bought, sold, and used as slaves. If I were an African American, and I had that history, and I had to listen to /r/SRS and /r/lgbt all day, I'd act homophobic as well.

Blah blah blah some people have it worse and that gives them the right to hate you if you complain about anything. Fuck off, this is the same idiotic derailing we were pointing out in the linked thread.

Your approach is to cut anyone out who is opposed to LGBTQ.

Because the LGBT subreddit should be a welcoming, open space for people who hate LGBT people. Also the NAACP should show some tolerance and host Klan meetings.

And the attitude that it's acceptable to say "die cis scum" while not being able to say "die faggot scum" makes your own privilege. For all the people out there who hate CIS people, there's far more that hate homosexuals. What gives one group of people the right to say, "DIE CIS SCUM" when one can't get a tattoo that says "DIE TRANNY SCUM" or "DIE FAGGOT SCUM"?

And why is there a black history month and not a WHITE history month? PRIVILEGE, that's why.

daftdaftdaft · 1 month

Yes.

daftdaftdaft · 1 month

I'm sure you feel really good about writing all this, and I wouldn't want to ruin that, so here:

I agree.

daftdaftdaft · 1 month

Now that we've been banned for not agreeing that a "die cis scum" tattoo is racist, I'm looking forward to being continually blamed anyway for turning lgbt into some kind of SRS outpost.

promethea_estrada · 1 month

No, it means that the person who wrote the thousand words has a bit better idea of the lives and realities of trans folks than the person who wrote the three words. It means that those lives and realities (the same ones you erase when you say "trans people are killed for being trans") are a bit more complex than three words.

As if those three words are the entirety of their grasp of trans issues? Like they haven't experienced life as a trans person in their own right? I really don't see how you can conclude that the verbose person has a "better idea of the lives and realities of trans folks" than the other.

promethea_estrada · 1 month

Should we instead believe that more oppressed does translate to "incapable of using silencing or derailing or distracting tactics or making invalid or fallacious or irrelevant arguments"?

promethea_estrada · 1 month

Thanks, now I understand

promethea_estrada · 1 month

Quoting myself from elsewhere:

Does it make you feel better if I instead call it using flawed arguments (ones which are easily recognized in other contexts) in an attempt to tell a trans person they shouldn't speak out on trans issues? Because, yeah, that's what they did, and that doesn't change no matter the races involved.

Is the word silencing too loaded to be used in this case?

Does an anonymous trans person of color have power over a well-known white trans person who feels safe enough to put a photo of them on the public Internet?

Do we actually know that the person in question never has put their photo on the internet? Because if not, I don't see how this demonstrates anything.

promethea_estrada · 1 month

Does it make you feel better if I instead call it using flawed arguments (ones which are easily recognized in other contexts) in an attempt to tell a trans person they shouldn't speak out on trans issues? Because, yeah, that's what they did, and that doesn't change no matter the races involved.

promethea_estrada · 1 month

Pointing out the flaws in that argument does not equate to a "failure to acknowledge trans people are not killed because they are trans and that most trans murders are of poor trans women of color youth who are sex workers". These things are orthogonal. One can readily acknowledge this, and still find the argument unsound and unhelpful and faulty.

promethea_estrada · 1 month

More oppressed doesn't translate to "incapable of using silencing or derailing or distracting tactics or making invalid or fallacious or irrelevant arguments".

promethea_estrada · 1 month

The assumption that white people can never be silenced by POC because they're white, is, again, just ignorant of intersectionality and axes of privilege entirely. And that seems totally contrary to the main thrust of the linked post.

promethea_estrada · 1 month

your automatic association of cis people with people of color is honestly kind of telling of why it's important to strive for including the perspectives of trans people of color.

The inverse doesn't make it any better, it just argues that white trans people can't say "die cis scum" because some trans people are POC, which I don't think makes any sense either. I recognize the argument, but it's like saying that people who are privileged enough to be articulate and have access to the internet shouldn't make use of this or speak out about trans issues because there are other trans people without these privileges - they'd be speaking for others, whom they don't represent. But just because someone is more able to do something due to privilege doesn't translate to an argument that they shouldn't - just that this is a disparity to be kept in mind.

statistical evidence clearly demonstrates that trans people of color face many times the amount of violence that white trans people do. generalizing this essay as saying "white trans people can't ever speak about trans issues" glosses over the important nuance of how being white can blind you from seeing that advocating violence isn't an option for all trans people.

If that was the point (and it's a perfectly valid one to raise), it could have been left at that - it didn't need to be extended into "this is a problem when you do it because you're white and I don't support it", either by the author or by followup comments.

that's why tattooing "die cis scum" is necessarily speaking for others, without consideration of trans people of color.

I would really, really hope that members of minorities are permitted to express their individual perspectives without this being forbidden just because other people of that marginalized group may not be exactly like them in every way, or choose to express the same opinions in the same way - is there not room for disagreement? - or because as members of a marginalized group they'll be inappropriately perceived as speaking for the group as a whole. This seems like exactly the kind of attitude everyone should avoid.

Six-Year Club	reddit gold Since May 2011
reddit mold	Verified Email
ComboLinker 2010-11-21

ComboLinker 2010-10-19	ComboLinker 2010-03-24
ComboLinker 2010-03-18	ComboLinker 2010-01-03

rmuser

TROPHY CASE

rmuser

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login