Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang>jurota i refuse to pay my taxes is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win tax is the best thing ever happened to us they tried to kill trump because he's the good guy trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
Do as you wish mate
Technically, it can be true yes. Althought it's not a really volontary process, but more of a simple evolution of language.
But what Zenos doesn't understand is that I in fact never get a definition wrong. In reality I mostly get it right, but my definition extends BEYOND the definition of the dictionnaries to the boundaries of the encyclopedias.
When - for example - Zenos tells me that "man" means "sex", while it can be true for dictionnaries with unedited or non updated version. It's not true for the encyclopedic and scientific observations of realities that goes far beyond what dictionnaries know.
If you want a metaphore, when I says that science and encyclopedia are superior to dictionnaries
Its me saying that it is MUCH more efficiant and reliable to study a planet through a Giant telescope with collections of datas and informations rather than through the science book of an highschool studient.
Technically, it can be true yes. Althought it's not a really volontary process, but more of a simple evolution of language.
But what Zenos doesn't understand is that I in fact never get a definition wrong. In reality I mostly get it right, but my definition extends BEYOND the definition of the dictionnaries to the boundaries of the encyclopedias.
When - for example - Zenos tells me that "man" means "sex", while it can be true for dictionnaries with unedited or non updated version. It's not true for the encyclopedic and scientific observations of realities that goes far beyond what dictionnaries know.
If you want a metaphore, when I says that science and encyclopedia are superior to dictionnaries
Its me saying that it is MUCH more efficiant and reliable to study a planet through a Giant telescope with collections of datas and informations rather than through the science book of an highschool studient.
"man" means "sex"?
nah bro, i just say man/woman are defined by sex, because they are. adult human male/female respectively.
a gender identity based definition is utterly meaningless, which is why no one except a very vocal minority uses these terms the way you do.
apples and oranges
nah bro, i just say man/woman are defined by sex, because they are. adult human male/female respectively.
a gender identity based definition is utterly meaningless, which is why no one except a very vocal minority uses these terms the way you do.
Post automatically merged:
apples and oranges
And that's why I say that you are wrong, since you are looking at the definition of dictionnaries that don't take the scientific consensus into account.
And this consensus will always be superior in reliability and value to dictionnaries. No matter the context.
And no, that's not apples and oranges.
And this consensus will always be superior in reliability and value to dictionnaries. No matter the context.
And no, that's not apples and oranges.
Just so you know. Trans people don't really like the word "transexual" as it was a word used by psychiatric institution a long time ago, to explain how they were mentally ill
Not necessarily indeed. But the fact that you are using a word, doesn't necessarily means that you are using it the right way. Dictionnaries are here to to note or rather should always be here to register the usage AND the scientific definition of words.
Problem, they sometimes do once without doing the other.
Dictionnaries are simply not reliable.
If you want to udnerstand the usage of a word : Go ask linguistic.
If you want to understand the scientific (and there more accurate) definition of a word : Go for encyclopedia or scientific definitions such as official sites or scientific journals.
Problem, when I'm rectifying the usage of words on this thread, it's because the usage are going AGAINST:
- The scientific definition and therefore the more accurate definition of the words
AND
- The healthy condition of some person.
Hence why I'm correcting you and telling you that you must not use dictionnary definition that are registring oppressing usages but scientific ones that take the life and legitimity of people into account.
Not necessarily indeed. But the fact that you are using a word, doesn't necessarily means that you are using it the right way. Dictionnaries are here to to note or rather should always be here to register the usage AND the scientific definition of words.
Problem, they sometimes do once without doing the other.
Dictionnaries are simply not reliable.
If you want to udnerstand the usage of a word : Go ask linguistic.
If you want to understand the scientific (and there more accurate) definition of a word : Go for encyclopedia or scientific definitions such as official sites or scientific journals.
Problem, when I'm rectifying the usage of words on this thread, it's because the usage are going AGAINST:
- The scientific definition and therefore the more accurate definition of the words
AND
- The healthy condition of some person.
Hence why I'm correcting you and telling you that you must not use dictionnary definition that are registring oppressing usages but scientific ones that take the life and legitimity of people into account.
compiling dictionaries is kind of a field in linguistics though.
so if i want to understand the usage of a word, i go look it up in a dictionary. or how do you think people learn new languages lmfao?
woman is not a scientific word per se. female is though. and woman as of now is defined by that.
if the word evolves to your meaning, dictionaries will adapt. but since, again, no one but a small minority is using it differently to "adult human female", the definition isnt updated.
which is why i told you like a hundred times now, hit us up if dictionaries update it to your definition. not that you have a working definition though.
but whatevs, we arent going to agree on this. using words as they are actually defined is how language is coherent and works.
so besides this, what exactly do you mean by "the healthy condition of some person"?
so if i want to understand the usage of a word, i go look it up in a dictionary. or how do you think people learn new languages lmfao?
woman is not a scientific word per se. female is though. and woman as of now is defined by that.
if the word evolves to your meaning, dictionaries will adapt. but since, again, no one but a small minority is using it differently to "adult human female", the definition isnt updated.
which is why i told you like a hundred times now, hit us up if dictionaries update it to your definition. not that you have a working definition though.
but whatevs, we arent going to agree on this. using words as they are actually defined is how language is coherent and works.
so besides this, what exactly do you mean by "the healthy condition of some person"?
just like they dont like the term gender identity disorder because of the negative connotation of "disorder". so the term "gender dysphoria" was created, but it still kinda means the same thing, just without the stigma.
if "woman" will stop being defined as "adult human female" and turns into some circular gender based garbage, i will stop using it altogether.
Post automatically merged:
if "woman" will stop being defined as "adult human female" and turns into some circular gender based garbage, i will stop using it altogether.
By healthy condition of some person, I mean no potential sufferings.
Indeed. The stigma makes the difference because said stigma can ALWAYS be used against them.
Not where I live no. But it could be for other country yes. And maybe it could create better results.
By studying linguistic or going into classes to learn those new language. You can't learn a language just by reciting dictionnaries, you need to understand the context in which to uses words and learn that sometimes, some usage are better than others.
Women IS a scientific word in the sence that it is recognized sociologically as a gender by human sciences.
I gave you plenty of ressource demonstrating just that. Now either you accept them or you don't. If you want to deny science, you are welcome, that would simply not be with my help.
Its "does not evolve to my meaning". Its already used to study what I'm talking about and to talk about the subject I'm talking about to understand the subject I'm talking about.
You are simply REFUSING to accept the distinction between sex and gender. For no reason. unless you tell me that you have problem accepting
that transwomen are women and trans men are men and then.. it would make perfect sence.
Like I said, Dictionnaries are not here to tell you what is right or wrong to use, they are here to tell you the usage of the words. Usage is a LINGUISTIC concept, it means "how the words are used in society".
It does not say that said or said usage are legitimate or not, it simply register the usages (most of the time too late and with not enough precisions)
So, no. I won't "hit you up with an updated definition" since it wouldn't tell you what is the legitimate or illegitimate usage of a word in a certain context.
Currentlty.. again.. for the 1000th times, I'm telling you that the LEGITIMATE usage is the usage that does NOT create oppression against Trans people.
In other word, the legitimate usage is the scientific usage and definition of the words men, women, female and males.
But sure.. if you want to use a usage that creates oppression, you can. But you will have me telling you constantly that your usage of the word is perfectly illegitimate from a scientific and ethical point of view.
Your choice
Sure, it must be hard to live your life.
Indeed. The stigma makes the difference because said stigma can ALWAYS be used against them.
Not where I live no. But it could be for other country yes. And maybe it could create better results.
By studying linguistic or going into classes to learn those new language. You can't learn a language just by reciting dictionnaries, you need to understand the context in which to uses words and learn that sometimes, some usage are better than others.
Women IS a scientific word in the sence that it is recognized sociologically as a gender by human sciences.
I gave you plenty of ressource demonstrating just that. Now either you accept them or you don't. If you want to deny science, you are welcome, that would simply not be with my help.
Its "does not evolve to my meaning". Its already used to study what I'm talking about and to talk about the subject I'm talking about to understand the subject I'm talking about.
You are simply REFUSING to accept the distinction between sex and gender. For no reason. unless you tell me that you have problem accepting
that transwomen are women and trans men are men and then.. it would make perfect sence.
Like I said, Dictionnaries are not here to tell you what is right or wrong to use, they are here to tell you the usage of the words. Usage is a LINGUISTIC concept, it means "how the words are used in society".
It does not say that said or said usage are legitimate or not, it simply register the usages (most of the time too late and with not enough precisions)
So, no. I won't "hit you up with an updated definition" since it wouldn't tell you what is the legitimate or illegitimate usage of a word in a certain context.
Currentlty.. again.. for the 1000th times, I'm telling you that the LEGITIMATE usage is the usage that does NOT create oppression against Trans people.
In other word, the legitimate usage is the scientific usage and definition of the words men, women, female and males.
But sure.. if you want to use a usage that creates oppression, you can. But you will have me telling you constantly that your usage of the word is perfectly illegitimate from a scientific and ethical point of view.
Your choice
Sure, it must be hard to live your life.
Why are the only topics ever discussed in this thread Religion and Transgenderism? 
If I want to know if a person is on my side I just need to ask two questions about Transidentity and meritocracy and its enough !
I would theorize that this way :
In politic there are various small political conflicts that put values against values that can be independant.
BUT
Certain political conflicts can be linked directly to others. For example, if you fight for the right of Trans people (since its the most conflictual subject that usually separate conservatist from progressists) I know from experience that there will be a HIGH probability that you will be aware of activism against heteronormativity, patriarchy, systemic racism and anti-validism.
On the other hand, if I know that you fight against meritocracy, I know from experience that most of your belief system will be directed against capitalism and toward a radical vision of leftism.
In other word, I use the first question to see if you are a progressist or a conservatist and I use the second question to know the degree of radicality of your progressism/leftism.
This won't be a perfect estimation, but it will be good enough to know that we have interest in common..
Last edited: