Moving to Canada or Australia. America became a dump in just a few month. Rusmerica, the third world dicatorship. Enjoy your stay if youre white, male and rich.
Bro, Germoney is full of white rich males, paying for your hormones.
If you want to really be free of patriachal cis-oppression, I suggest to move to the leftist utopia Venezuela.
Nah, i take those free hormones and then move to a country that is not terrorist-funding-Germany or Rusmerica.
The joke is that Sarah is a white male and has clearly never lived in a dictatorship.
It's amazing how many people I once considered cornerstones of this community are revealing themselves to be intolerant and disrespectful of the life choices of others. Oh, and sure, feel free to say, 'but you're mocking us republicans and conservatives'...because I'm sure political and social beliefs and leanings are on the same personal level to you as someone's sexual identity.
All that tells me is you've probably never really thought that hard about anyone's sexual identity, including your own.
Identity, you say.
Nearly all of us here have forum identities. We've invested a lot of time and effort into developing a vaguely consistent and at least occasionally entertaining persona that posts on this site. The reason for that investment is that this type of identity is valuable to us; we consider the investment worthwhile. Some of us would be devastated if this persona was damaged somehow, deservedly or not (ex: the ARPGFan debacle).
But to act as if this investment in identity is the only way, is crazy. Lots of people give zero fucks about their PoE forum persona. They maybe used to use it to set up a shop thread, that's it. Not everyone must be a forum regular, nor could we feasibily accommodate it if everyone wanted to be.
The claim that our forum identities are "rights" and GGG is compelled to provide for them is prima facie absurd.
In the same way, it is a little perverse to pretend one's sexual identity is some sacred cow that matters more than anything else about a person. Sexuality is behavior first and identity a distant second. Each person is, or at least should be, free to attach as little or as much relevance to a sex act, investing as much or as little identity, as they choose.
And we cannot, as a society, sustain this tendency to overly invest identity in such relative trivialities as who one fucks or what gender we wish to be. There is room for that, but not nearly enough room for everyone to find their own specialness when so many try to find their identity in such narrow niches. We need people investing their identity in their professions, in their philosophies, in their art, and all other areas of human endeavor.
This concept of yours, that sexual identity is somehow elevated above all others, that it is sacred and immune to criticism while all other forms of identity are vulnerable, is actually profoundly bigoted. So, of course, you go on the offensive and accuse us of it first.
No form of identity as above reproach. None. Identity is more than just who we are; it's what we think is important, or at least relevant, about who we are. As such, identity is about values. A person of a particular skin color should not be reproached purely for their skin color, but if they invest their identity in it, if they say they are a better or worse person because of it, if they believe that the color of their skin has relevance, then they are as vulnerable to critique as their belief in said relevance.
Identity politics will always be a false path (whether employed by those with identities like oneself or unlike, whether minority identities or majority identities). Liberty politics is the true path. I am unlikely to ever give a fuck about a person's identity as gay, or as a transexual. But I believe they should be able to fuck any consenting adult they wish, or modify their body however they choose (providing they pay for it). Why? Neither infringes on the liberty of anyone else. Good laws aren't about identities, they are about behaviors, and focusing on the behaviors themselves is the heart of liberty politics. Laws that are about identities are about applying the law to one set of people — those who profess the politically correct opinions — and not another — the dissenters; such a practice is antithetical to the rule of law.
We have no moral obligation to accept any particular identity, nor do you have an obligation to accept ours. Tolerate, yes; we hold freedom of belief as a key value absolutely essential to our civilization. But accept, no. There is a difference, which is why the regressive Left has already begun decrying that tolerance is insufficient and acceptance must now be compelled.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on May 11, 2017, 11:30:10 AM
The joke is that Sarah is a white male and has clearly never lived in a dictatorship.
It's amazing how many people I once considered cornerstones of this community are revealing themselves to be intolerant and disrespectful of the life choices of others. Oh, and sure, feel free to say, 'but you're mocking us republicans and conservatives'...because I'm sure political and social beliefs and leanings are on the same personal level to you as someone's sexual identity.
All that tells me is you've probably never really thought that hard about anyone's sexual identity, including your own.
Identity, you say.
Nearly all of us here have forum identities. We've invested a lot of time and effort into developing a vaguely consistent and at least occasionally entertaining persona that posts on this site. The reason for that investment is that this type of identity is valuable to us; we consider the investment worthwhile. Some of us would be devastated if this persona was damaged somehow, deservedly or not (ex: the ARPGFan debacle).
But to act as if this investment in identity is the only way, is crazy. Lots of people give zero fucks about their PoE forum persona. They maybe used to use it to set up a shop thread, that's it. Not everyone must be a forum regular, nor could we feasibily accommodate it if everyone wanted to be.
The claim that our forum identities are "rights" and GGG is compelled to provide for them is prima facie absurd.
In the same way, it is a little perverse to pretend one's sexual identity is some sacred cow that matters more than anything else about a person. Sexuality is behavior first and identity a distant second. Each person is, or at least should be, free to attach as little or as much relevance to a sex act, investing as much or as little identity, as they choose.
And we cannot, as a society, sustain this tendency to overly invest identity in such relative trivialities as who one fucks or what gender we wish to be. There is room for that, but not nearly enough room for everyone to find their own specialness when so many try to find their identity in such narrow niches. We need people investing their identity in their professions, in their philosophies, in their art, and all other areas of human endeavor.
This concept of yours, that sexual identity is somehow elevated above all others, that it is sacred and immune to criticism while all other forms of identity are vulnerable, is actually profoundly bigoted. So, of course, you go on the offensive and accuse us of it first.
No form of identity as above reproach. None. Identity is more than just who we are; it's what we think is important, or at least relevant, about who we are. As such, identity is about values. A person of a particular skin color should not be reproached purely for their skin color, but if they invest their identity in it, if they say they are a better or worse person because of it, if they believe that the color of their skin has relevance, then they are as vulnerable to critique as their belief in said relevance.
Identity politics will always be a false path (whether employed by those with identities like oneself or unlike, whether minority identities or majority identities). Liberty politics is the true path. I am unlikely to ever give a fuck about a person's identity as gay, or as a transexual. But I believe they should be able to fuck any consenting adult they wish, or modify their body however they choose (providing they pay for it). Why? Neither infringes on the liberty of anyone else. Good laws aren't about identities, they are about behaviors, and focusing on the behaviors themselves is the heart of liberty politics. Laws that are about identities are about applying the law to one set of people — those who profess the politically correct opinions — and not another — the dissenters; such a practice is antithetical to the rule of law.
We have no moral obligation to accept any particular identity, nor do you have an obligation to accept ours. Tolerate, yes; we hold freedom of belief as a key value absolutely essential to our civilization. But accept, no. There is a difference, which is why the regressive Left has already begun decrying that tolerance is insufficient and acceptance must now be compelled.
Scrotie, GTFO with your reasonable and rational posts. More memes and trolling pls!
You have to be realistic about these things.
Logen Ninefingers
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
The joke is that Sarah is a white male and has clearly never lived in a dictatorship.
It's amazing how many people I once considered cornerstones of this community are revealing themselves to be intolerant and disrespectful of the life choices of others. Oh, and sure, feel free to say, 'but you're mocking us republicans and conservatives'...because I'm sure political and social beliefs and leanings are on the same personal level to you as someone's sexual identity.
All that tells me is you've probably never really thought that hard about anyone's sexual identity, including your own.
Identity, you say.
Nearly all of us here have forum identities. We've invested a lot of time and effort into developing a vaguely consistent and at least occasionally entertaining persona that posts on this site. The reason for that investment is that this type of identity is valuable to us; we consider the investment worthwhile. Some of us would be devastated if this persona was damaged somehow, deservedly or not (ex: the ARPGFan debacle).
But to act as if this investment in identity is the only way, is crazy. Lots of people give zero fucks about their PoE forum persona. They maybe used to use it to set up a shop thread, that's it. Not everyone must be a forum regular, nor could we feasibily accommodate it if everyone wanted to be.
The claim that our forum identities are "rights" and GGG is compelled to provide for them is prima facie absurd.
In the same way, it is a little perverse to pretend one's sexual identity is some sacred cow that matters more than anything else about a person. Sexuality is behavior first and identity a distant second. Each person is, or at least should be, free to attach as little or as much relevance to a sex act, investing as much or as little identity, as they choose.
And we cannot, as a society, sustain this tendency to overly invest identity in such relative trivialities as who one fucks or what gender we wish to be. There is room for that, but not nearly enough room for everyone to find their own specialness when so many try to find their identity in such narrow niches. We need people investing their identity in their professions, in their philosophies, in their art, and all other areas of human endeavor.
This concept of yours, that sexual identity is somehow elevated above all others, that it is sacred and immune to criticism while all other forms of identity are vulnerable, is actually profoundly bigoted. So, of course, you go on the offensive and accuse us of it first.
No form of identity as above reproach. None. Identity is more than just who we are; it's what we think is important, or at least relevant, about who we are. As such, identity is about values. A person of a particular skin color should not be reproached purely for their skin color, but if they invest their identity in it, if they say they are a better or worse person because of it, if they believe that the color of their skin has relevance, then they are as vulnerable to critique as their belief in said relevance.
Identity politics will always be a false path (whether employed by those with identities like oneself or unlike, whether minority identities or majority identities). Liberty politics is the true path. I am unlikely to ever give a fuck about a person's identity as gay, or as a transexual. But I believe they should be able to fuck any consenting adult they wish, or modify their body however they choose (providing they pay for it). Why? Neither infringes on the liberty of anyone else. Good laws aren't about identities, they are about behaviors, and focusing on the behaviors themselves is the heart of liberty politics. Laws that are about identities are about applying the law to one set of people — those who profess the politically correct opinions — and not another — the dissenters; such a practice is antithetical to the rule of law.
We have no moral obligation to accept any particular identity, nor do you have an obligation to accept ours. Tolerate, yes; we hold freedom of belief as a key value absolutely essential to our civilization. But accept, no. There is a difference, which is why the regressive Left has already begun decrying that tolerance is insufficient and acceptance must now be compelled.
It's not that we're obliged to accept certain differences, it's just the decent thing to do. For some twats it's seemingly more important to put others in their place than to be decent. And as far as I know, that isn't a behaviour we're obliged to respect in return.
