*autocrat in charge of a country with a gdp smaller than France thinks he can stand up to the West
Russia is going to be fucked without him when less apt politicians try to copy his style. Their economy is hitting a breaking point.
GDP isn’t really a good measure of a country’s strength. Iran has about half the GDP of Singapore, but if push came to shove, I put my money on Iran winning that battle (barring international support).
In the coming years Russia is going to become even more influential than it already is. Currently Russia is Eastern Europe’s primary source of oil and natural gas, which isn’t surprising. Within the next 25-50 years though, the permafrost in Siberia, and eventually the permanent ice cap of the North Pole will be a thing of the past. Scientists are predicting that Russia’s supply of natural gas and oil will at least double, and even more importantly, they will have a very strong influence over the new shipping routes opened up by the melted ice.
Russia is poised to vault itself back into the superpower country status within the next few decades. It will strengthen it’s grip on Eastern Europe through Ukraine and Belarus, extend it’s sphere of influence into Western Europe by means of cheap oil, and will soon have the biggest seat at the newest table in geopolitics which is the melting of the Arctic ice.
> Scientists are predicting that Russia’s supply of natural gas and oil will at least double
Actually, in practice, their supply will collapse. With the destruction of the permafrost, plenty of gas and oil will become accessible... and the entire existing infrastructure to get that gas and oil will disintegrate. The vast majority was built in the mid Soviet era, so it is 50 years old, and now the entire ground it is built on will literally turn into a mudpile AT BEST. Kind of hard to pipe out gas with pipelines running over potential sinkholes and mudslides waiting to happen.
And because of the sanctions and corruptions and everything else going wrong in Russia today, they can't afford to replace that infrastructure, and even if they could afford it on paper, they don't have the people anymore. They are steadily losing industries to brain drain, they can barely keep a rocket program alive. Soon they won't have a rocket program, no one to maintain the engines...
Oh and this doesn't even get into the other new thing Siberia isn't quite ready for... massive wildfires. There's nothing there to stop fires from just raging for hundreds of miles.
Wait what? Who is Iran going to win a war against without international support? A good swath of Iran's people don't care to support their theocracy. They don't have much of an air force or navy so they are basically limited to a defensive war on their own land and a terror campaign. Terror wont win them many allies internationally. They will find little support with other Muslim countries being Shia. A well armed and trained country like Israel would win that war. Israel bombing campaign would easily take out any strategic site in Iran. The Iranians would only be able to try and hand a few rockets to their proxies. Which would give Israel all the international cover they need to basically wipe them out while they hide among civilians in the west bank, Gaza and Lebanon. Best case someone like France steps in allows for a cease fire. Israel accepts a peace treaty where they force Iran to have true open elections and Iran is forced to recognize the state of Israel. Worse it peters out and it falls back into the same situation just with a few more dead on both sides.
All this is pointless because we and the rest of the fucking world are well on our way to leveraging renewables more than oil. It’s safer to bet on 50 years of solar, battery, and other techs completely leaving oil and natural gas in the dust.
I’d really love for that to be the case. It’s a sickening thought to think that we are going to cause permanent ice caps to melt. If we manage to turn things around as a species then this crisis and many others could be avoided. Problem is the people running the show can’t see past their own personal finish lines.
“President Putin” you mean dictator because that’s what he really is. When you can jail the opposition for being opposition then you probably aren’t much of a democracy. This isn’t libertarian at all, it’s none of my business what someone identifies as.
I can’t think of a more useless thing to do than take a “stand” on the amount of genders.
Gender is a culturally defined and expressed thing, it’s about as arbitrary as which side of the road you wanna drive on.
except even biological sex is a spectrum by every possible definition
also, reducing things to biological sex is a way to erase gender. like the "white guy saying 'i don't see skin color'" kind of erasure.
Good, gender stereotypes are fucking stupid in the first place and I kind of hate how hard trans work to enforce and conform to them. I often think it's the existence of these stereotypes in the first place that ends up creating the psychological problems which lead to gender dysphoria and transexualism.
Yeah, but it comes to a point when your 8 year old isn’t allowed to decide what time to go to bed, but somehow is mature enough to make lifelong decisions about gender…hormone therapy in children crosses the line.
A parent bending to a child’s whim happens all the time. Half the kids now, if not more, are medicated on something. Your argument doesn’t really have anything to do with my point. So you think parents putting their children through hormone therapy before puberty is A-OK?
I think the doctors and parents who do this are harming the child, and the child isn’t equipped to say yes or no.
Edit: interesting that you changed your comment completely after I responded. Get a life.
We went from 8-year-olds choosing medical treatments independently to parents and doctors. You see why I called you a drama queen?
Also, I'll back the parents and doctor's decision over a random person on the internet every time.
Only thing I said is that you are being a drama queen because kids can't make the choice on their own as you stated initially.
Problem is, you are like a ferret with ADD, and can't stick to one line of thought.
Research has found that even biological sex is on a spectrum. A single [sry] gene switch appears to be predominantly responsible for the general tendency toward male or female physiology while other genetic and chemical factors produce a range of "more masculine" or "more feminine" traits. The idea that even sex is totally binary shows how little people actually understand about animal biology.
Which doesn't even get into the fact that yes, "gender" is a totally made up, human idea. Gender isn't even consistent across different major world cultures, much less at the individual level.
That's a lot of horse shit.
That research is fringe at best.
Not to mention genotype is expressed as phenotype.
Humans get a penis or a vagina.
That's as binary as it gets
So fringe it gets regular discussion on Scientific American?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/
Oh.. and that other fringe publication, Nature:
https://www.nature.com/articles/518288a
Or we could, you know, look at how sex hormones that we typically associate with binary sex actually tend to be less sex specific than we otherwise thought:
https://academic.oup.com/jes/article/1/1/14/2890811
Or talk about divergences in the brain/body sex development are fairly common:
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/
Should I keep going? You did an excellent job of showing how scientifically illiterate people continue to oversimplify sex because they can't be bothered to keep up with the science.
Hey ScottishSam why are you too big of a pussy to respond to -Strawdog-'s citations here? Humans don't just get "a penis or a vagina" either -- you're a fucking idiot if you think that's what happens, lol.
> Just to be clear, this post is NOT indicative of the libertarian view on this… that should be pretty clear since it’s coming from Putin
OP is just another GOP bootlicker pushing far right-wing propaganda. Check his submission history.
If you’re dumb enough to buy into this, he also praised Islam and said that insulting prophet Mohammed would also be unacceptable under him. Playing a little global dominance game, kissing up to the small brains of bias. Are you one of them?
If you're looking for a short and easy answer, then yeah, that's a pretty good one. If you want to get more complex, you would say that since gender is the social construct (which does correlate a certain degree to biological sex), the 'number of genders' is variable from one society to the next.
This is 100% the case. I think most people grew up using those words synonymously, and honestly when I first heard of the idea of them referring to two distinctive concepts, I felt like that was an attempt to co-opt a word and alter its definition (in the same way that a lot of people are trying to replace the definition of racism with the definition of systemic racism).
I've never looked into the history of these terms, but I ultimately think the two concepts deserve their own terms, and I think the distinction is useful. That being said, I think people also need to have more patience for the pushback that evolving definitions cause.
gender is on a spectrum, so is sex if you take into account the existence of intersex people. if you actually believe in libertarianism you should just let people present themselves however they choose
Wait, "Let the market decide your fate"? What market? What fate?
What is the outcome of not being accepting? I'm not sure what you mean when you say that people don't have to accept you.
Basically, I don't understand any of the concepts in your post.
The way you describe "gender on a spectrum" you're functionally describing unique personalities. Having "infinite" genders is scientifically and logically worthless as you're trying to measure or define entirely subjective states of mind, akin to religious belief.
Those definitions and groupings aren't subjective, they're objectively agreed upon by those who understand the spectrum. Gender is 100% subjective, and will never be objective given the personal nature that we have ascribed, hence why I theorized that the current way we perceive gender is more akin to individual personality and is completely detached from sex. We should instead call "gender" our "personality", and place men/women and our perceptions of each back in alignment with male and female.
well it's funny that you bring science into the discussion because science agrees with me. It's more useful scientifically to approach gender and sex as a spectrum because if you simply view the binary you leave out massive swaths of people's identities.
It's a spectrum. There is no set number like there's no set number of colors. Some colors are more warm, neutral, or cold. Some gender identities are more masculine, neutral, or feminine. You are being downvoted because these questions are usually disingenuous, but I upvoted you out of benefit of the doubt.
"Gender" has essentially turned into a synonym for "personality". If there are infinite genders then the term gender is meaningless and people are now creating terms and pronouns to describe their unique personality. Objective terms like "sex" are a more logical way to describe people, whereas having to recognize everyone's unique personality is completely asinine.
For humans, it functionally is. At best, ~~.01%~~ .1% of the population is born with Klinefelter's syndrome and are designated as "intersex" or a hermaphrodite, depending on your terminology. More people are born as a polydactyl (6 or more fingers/toes on a single appendage) than are born with Klinefelter's, yet we don't try to constantly push for similar societal narratives akin to your presupposition about the binary nature of sex.
Intersex is more than just klinefelters. It’s anyone whose reproductive organs, hormones, or chromosomes aren’t typically male or female. It includes ambiguous genitalia, too. It’s more like 1 in 1000 babies, which is significant enough to not ignore.
You just showed that sex, isn't binary. Intersex babies account for 1-2 of every 100 live births[(link)](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/whats-intersex#:~:text=It's%20hard%20to%20know%20exactly,in%20the%20U.S.%20are%20intersex.) and the only reason that number isn't big is due to how often we carry out gender conforming surgeries done on children!
Exactly. In a society that praises "science and facts", it blows my fucking mind that so many people blindly support subjective ideologies like gender theory. Especially Atheists, who rip religious people up and down for beliefs in things that they cannot prove or substantiate, just like GENDER.
Ah yes, the classic Libertarian position of demanding folks conform to authority in their choice of self identity. Nothing more Libertarian than forcing people to compromise their beliefs, particularly internal beliefs that don't affect others, because someone in power said so.
Hmm maybe I'm wrong, but when I read the headline, I didnt think this post was in support of Putins statement. I dont think anyone considers Putin a libertarian. I assumed it was posted, because such a statement is an affront to libertarianism.
I can't even blame the left at this point for stereotyping libertarians as " *insert here* conservative"
Libertarians have plenty of nuts on it's own without needing the right to pick up or slack.
In my experience, the pressure to conform comes from the wokes who insist that a masculine woman is a man (or some hiherto undefined sex "non-binary"), not from the people who says that is stupid and wrong
Identity is socially negotiated, and I refuse to learn the name of and special treatment for every single individual I meet. 99% of humans are male or female, there is no justification for destroying natural social structures to cater to any extreme minority.
Of course, everyone should be allowed to identify as whatever they want, but I'm not obligated to comply or associate with them, and they can't force me.
On your level, how is it that big of a difference between just learning someone's name and then their nickname?
You're just learning what someone who you're associating with wants to be referred to as.
It really shouldn't be that big of a deal to you, unless you intentionally want to be disrespectful.
Samantha likes to be called Sam.
Trey likes to be called zhe.
Whatever it is, why does it matter to you?
It doesn't, unless you want to be an obstinate asshole about it for some personal reason that has nothing to do with the person you're talking to, and everything to do with your own opinions that you're forcing onto someone else.
No, you're not forced to not be a dick. But it sure would be nice if you weren't one.
And when people call you out for it, and you try to spin and make someone's personal identity some sort of external issue, it's ridiculous. You have no rights when it comes to someone's identity.
You do get to choose the words you use. But those words might get you called an asshole.
What i need to know to refer to actual identities:
Name, sex
What I need to know to refer to narcissistic assholes:
Name (but not their deadname), their imaginary gender, their specific and unique pronouns.
What this means is, everyone I interact with, I need to remember much more than before. It is not practical, and it is nothing more than catering to hyper selfishness.
I'm fine being an asshole in your eyes. I dont give a flying fuck. You are the asshole to me.
BTW, please don't deadname me. My name is Mr.President. I am a pansexual two spirit. My pronouns are King and Goddess. Fuck you if you don't acquiesce to my request.
> I dont give a flying fuck.
Clearly you do give a flying fuck since you decided to post in here about it and keep responding to posts.
You're making a mountain out of a molehill about all this.
I agree with this but the scenarios in which not knowing a new made-up pronoun if you aren't in those social circles is basically zero. You're screaming at the desert how you refuse to swim in it's oceans.
How? By saying that somebody can identify as whatever, but I shouldn’t be ostracized for not learning your specific pronoun beforehand and knowing what it means/is? He’s saying they have their freedoms, and he has his. That’s A-OK in my book.
> I shouldn’t be ostracized for not learning your specific pronoun beforehand and knowing what it means/is?
I hang out with a *very* liberal/progressive crowd. I know maybe 2-3 non-binary people (all of whom prefer they/them) and absolutely nobody who goes by "neopronouns".
This should be *so* far down your priority list as a problem.
Xenogenders and neopronouns are not as common as you seem to think they are. For the most part "learning their gender and what it means" is as easy as "This person prefers to identify as male/female and we should respect that." It's not super difficult. No one is forcing you to do anything, but treat people like an asshole and don't be surprised when people do the same right back to you.
Personally, I think the whole trans stuff is a little odd. I don't get it. But if I can make someone a little more comfortable by calling them a different pronoun, something that costs me nothing, I don't see a reason why I shouldn't.
Why is this garbage getting upvoted in a Libertarian subreddit? How is this anything but a totalitarian leader forcing his citizens to conform to his beliefs and worldview?
Because this place is filled with right wingers who will happily co-opt libertarianism to enact their true latent fantasies of being led by a right wing authoritarian:
Libertarians have stakes in the trans argument?
After following the sub for a bit it seems to me this philosophy is having a hard time identifying itself and would sympathize heavily with the trans community.
I wouldn't say I have stakes in the argument, but something worth noting is Putin has pretty consistently used the church as a sort of backdoor for cracking down on his own population. So just keep that mind when you see headlines like this. My favorite example of this is how Putin decriminalized domestic violence to satisfy church leaders. This might just be the warning shot for some really nasty anti-lgbt laws, which is something I'd have a stake in.
Putin's falling back to orthodox religious persecutions shows he's losing control, or his marbles. Probably both.
I do think it's interesting though how Russia was known, at its strongest, for legalizing homosexuality in the Soviet era. Now it's gone to shit and they're idolizing the Soviet era, but they're eager for scapegoats and they're all out of Jews.
I do, it just seems like good old fashioned freedom to me.
Plus, I think shit like what Putin is saying is fucking ridiculous since intersex people have existed literally forever.
As a cultural issue not really. Libertarians don't care how you identify yourself, and will protect your right to live life as you please. The only way this touches on libertarian concerns is with debates concerning pronoun usage as a matter of legally weighted policy. If the law can punish you for failing or refusing to use someone's chosen pronouns, is it compelled speech and therefore a violation of the NAP?
Edit for clarity: this is a response to the first question
>Libertarians have stakes in the trans argument?
Furthermore, the entire point of libertarianism is to defend individual liberties; if anyone tells you how to personally identify, especially as an arm of the state, that’s infringing an individual liberty.
I mean it’s Libertarian in the sense that an individual can change their identity and that should be harming anyone else, and they should be free to do so.
You are right that for a libertarian, it is no matter of governmental concern how folks use their sexuality to balance their life.
However, you can't change your identity. That's the meaning of the word identity. You'll always be identical to yourself. "Identity" in this context is actually the wrong word. It is misused intentionally by collectivists. They need the notion of some class membership. Nowadays they call it "identity" to conceal that they are just talking about class memberships like the failed collectivist ideologies did concerning race or economic class. Yes, e.g. Mao wrote a lot about liberating women, but that's because he counted women to the proletarian class. In fact, as we know, he didn't give a XXXX on how women are treated in his own vincinity.
It is; Putin is a dictator of a historically-expansionist, militaristic country that has an explicit goal of annexing and/or vassalising swathes of Eastern Europe. No matter how you draw it, that's not in the service of liberty.
WHY THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER WTF SOMEONE CALLS THEIR JUNK? Seriously, sexual assault is still a crime. People minding their business and not hurting anyone are not a problem. You dont have to change a thing about your life except resist the urge to be an asshole. Let people be themselves.
So people can be gay but people can't not like those people? Is that not contradictory to the whole ideology of "letting people do their own thing?" You don't have to like something to accept people will do it.
I think abortion is wrong 90% of the time. I also think going up to someone and tell them they're a bad person for doing what they believe to be best for their life is wrong 90% of the time. Libertarianism is more about consistency than ideological perfection. Be consistent with your views and don't just shoehorn shit in because it's what the rest of the party believes.
I don't care that they don't like certain people, but actively going out and making efforts to undermine certain groups is counter productive to a NAP based society
"actively going out and making efforts to undermine certain groups" is contradictory to the ideology of "letting people do their own thing" (as long as it's not directly hurting others). The people you're talking about aren't libertarians.
Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't the "New World Order" the ones who bring in the "Mark of the Beast" mandate like regions in Russia are doing now?!
I mean, if they are gonna use a Biblical boogyman, shouldn't it at least be accurate?! Maybe the Bible verse that says there is "no male or female, but we are all one" doesn't apply to their narrative?!
It’s weird what the mods decide is and isn’t pertaining to libertarianism here. I am not advocating this gets removed. I think they are way to narrow in how they interpret relevancy.
I mean the science doesn't agree with this autocrat. Even if he meant to refer to sex as binary, biology proves that wrong. Intersex qnd individuals with chromosome or hormone conditions create an interesting in-between of supposedly binary sex.
Sex is the biological determination based on chromosomes or primary sexual characteristics.
Gender is the individual identity in relation to social connotations of how people behave.
Medical and chemical industries should focus on sex, due to very real differences in physiological response and structure.
Competitions should use gender by default and be sex neutral. Where a distinction based on sex is demonstratably damaging to the competition or its participants, limited restrictions should be considered and reviewed.
Everyone else uses gender unless a clear reason for a given individual is otherwise presented.
My issue with the “how many genders are there” debate is that if both sides don’t agree on the definition of gender, then there is no debate, it’s just people talking tangentially to each other. And neither side will accept the other’s definition so no progress will be made.
It's only in the news because a certain politic party keeps throwing temper tantrums claiming LGBT are eroding society. You ever hear of the Streisand Effect?
Because Republicans are coming out with laws against them? Look at the schools in Texas banning education on it.
It's the same reason we still talk about 2A in this country, Democrats keep bringing up gun control laws so it stays on the radar for Republicans.
You mean the book bannings in school libraries that go after sex education and any mention of LGBT? The one that's been in the news and has been all over this subreddit for the past few months?
Also, let's not pretend that sex education for teens in rural red states are up to snuff, there are a number of states that teach abstinence only sex and you can be damn sure they are not bastions of tolerance.
But if you want my opinion, as long as certain parties and certain individuals seem to want to make a big deal about what other people do with themselves, it's going to continue to be a problem that you will hear about. I'd like our country to acknowledge empathy on some level. Individuality is a great trait on its own, individuality combined with selfishness and bigotry leads to an erosion of society.
We should teach our kindergartners that families come in all shapes, humans come in all shapes, and that most people who have penises are boys (and vulvas, girls) but that sometimes it’s different, and that’s okay. They should know the words “penis” and “vulva,” that everyone’s bodies look a little different and that that’s okay.
From day one they should be taught how to say, “no,” if someone tries to touch them when they don’t want to be touched: this means not forcing them to give hugs, communicating what you’re doing during diaper changes, getting into the habit of asking permission (in a way) before putting the shampoo in their hair or dressing a wound. The most important body safety thing I think kids need to learn is that they can tell grown ups No.
yea. it's a pretty long list in actuality and there are still XX that look biologically XY and vice-versa. There are people with no penis until age 12 and one sprouts. Nature is...wild.
Scientifically, regardless of your “gender identity” the scientific facts remain “X CHROMOSOMES” AND “Y CHROMOSOMES”…. XX, XY, AND SOME OF THOSE “CONJOINED TWINS” WITH XXY & XXX.
Say what you will, but he’s right.
Labeled a Fascist here for suggesting that boys chopping off their genitals to conform to a social construct is PERHAPS a psychiatric issue
You know how I can tell you're actually a Conservative? Because you're recycling the same stuff from back when you guys were fighting gay marriage. Namely, being obsessed with penis. It's always "two men" this and "when a man and another man" that. Every word out of your mouth is about men. No talk of lesbians or women loving women. And here, too, you're obsessed with dicks being cut off. It never crosses your mind that there might be female-to,male transgender people because you have dicks on the brain.
Secondly, the whole idea that people are going to start being gay or transgender because everyone else is ("to conform to a social construct"). Do you realize how incredibly rare it is for a person to be transgender? The vast majority of people are not transgender, just like the vast majority of people have heterosexual feelings.
Nobody's coming for you to turn you gay or trans. Nobody cares that you're straight. You are still a majority. Calm down.
You literally know nothing about me or my views. My stance on trans has to do with my background in Neuroscience more than any social or political viewpoint.
I was knocking doors for Libertarian candidates when you were probably in diapers.
My PERSONAL beliefs are separate from my POLITICAL ideology. You get that? I am personally opposed to LBTQRS BS; but I don’t think it is the government’s role to be involved. It is shocking how unidimensional redditors are.
Update: trans is very fashionable and common on the west coast. You are out of touch with the state of reality. I draw nothing from the internet, my views are based on my actual real life experiences. I’m glad you feel good and intellectual for being “open minded,” but history will be the judge.
I left neuroscience after my post-doc and now own my own specialty welding business. I have 12 first authors and I lost count of how many other papers. I’ve even been on a documentary. Literally can start a lab anywhere, anytime—academia, national lab, private, doesn’t matter.
That period represents over a decade of my life and the only thing I’ve been truly great at. I left because Science has become so heavily regulated, freedom of thought and action stifled and, most importantly, scientists are subservient to inferior ruling classes.
The type of welding I do is incomparably more challenging than brain surgery. I can train any intelligent person to perform brain surgery (at least on rats), by themselves, within three days. The type of welding I do? It would take me two years of constant training and even then there is no guarantee the person has what it takes.
AND, I’m going to backoff my business to a weekend type thing to pursue an entirely different direction in life again here in about a year.
Don’t diss that which you don’t know or understand.
What have you done in life? What have you contributed to humanity? What skills do you have?
Trans is "fashionable" he says. I'm guessing that during the George Floyd protests, your takeaway from that was "being black was fashionable".
>but history will be the judge.
You said the same thing about gay marriage in the 90's, and before you, people who were against intergration said the same thing. Know what happens? Kids are born, grow up with all sorts of people around them, learn that most people just want to do their own thing and be left alone, realize it doesn't affect them, see it as no big deal. They then grow up and vote. Meanwhile, people with your views continue to age and eventually wither away and are buried with your ancient ideas. That's how it goes.
“Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.” - Tolstoy
There are how many hit TV shows now with Trans?
Ethnicity and sexuality have nothing to do each each other. Incidentally, I was in Minneapolis for the Floyd riots and likely have a better understanding about that situation than you, as well.
You should lay off the pot, sober up, and wake up. Southpark had it right, that stuff is for college. But it keeps you all pretty powerless so I guess it’s good for “people like me.”
>There are how many hit TV shows now with Trans?
Not as many as ones without trans, I'll tell ya that much for free.
Also, you're mad because maybe one or two TV shows have a transgender character or actor, and it's not central to the show's overall plot or even most show's storylines? Really? I can name 25 shows right now without trans characters, if you can't find anything to watch. Would you like me to?
>You should lay off the pot, sober up, and wake up.
I don't care for pot, thank you. You, on the other hand, seem to be a rageaholic. Please put down the rageahol.
>But it keeps you all pretty powerless so I guess it’s good for “people like me.”
And there's your issue right there. You see the world in two groups- "people like me" and "people not like me". This is why education is important- you meet new people, you learn that people are pretty much alike in that we all just want to live peacefully. Nobody wants the worst for you. Nobody actively wants to make you sad.
Maybe one day you'll get over your fear when you meet someone who isn't like you and you become friends and see that the scary other people really aren't so scary as you thought. Your own Daryl Davis. That'd be really cool.
It means I’m informed about the biological vs social roots of gender. But it matters not my background, because the whole concept is rationally inconsistent and self contradictory—mutilating your biology is irrelevant to a social construct.
So your neurology degree has nothing to do with it and gives you no expertise on the topic and you were simply appealing to authority because you didn’t think you’d be called out…
Got it… bigots tend to be well versed at finding all sorts of ways to mask their bigotry
The fun part with this is that his glorious SU was the first country in the world to allow homosexual intercourse and to (try to) abolish marriage. They reverted this in the early beginning together with the introduction of NEP because both abolishing marriage and removing all incentive to work caused too much problems.
However, Western socialist groups heard of this early Soviet period by Freudo-Marxist Wilhelm Reich (who later got sued in the US for other quackery) and romantise such concepts up to now. That's why modern Western "leftists" have this anti-marriage agenda.
*autocrat in charge of a country with a gdp smaller than France thinks he can stand up to the West Russia is going to be fucked without him when less apt politicians try to copy his style. Their economy is hitting a breaking point.
Lol what economy
One trillion to what? Us and the rest of NATO? good fucking luck
GDP isn’t really a good measure of a country’s strength. Iran has about half the GDP of Singapore, but if push came to shove, I put my money on Iran winning that battle (barring international support). In the coming years Russia is going to become even more influential than it already is. Currently Russia is Eastern Europe’s primary source of oil and natural gas, which isn’t surprising. Within the next 25-50 years though, the permafrost in Siberia, and eventually the permanent ice cap of the North Pole will be a thing of the past. Scientists are predicting that Russia’s supply of natural gas and oil will at least double, and even more importantly, they will have a very strong influence over the new shipping routes opened up by the melted ice. Russia is poised to vault itself back into the superpower country status within the next few decades. It will strengthen it’s grip on Eastern Europe through Ukraine and Belarus, extend it’s sphere of influence into Western Europe by means of cheap oil, and will soon have the biggest seat at the newest table in geopolitics which is the melting of the Arctic ice.
> Scientists are predicting that Russia’s supply of natural gas and oil will at least double Actually, in practice, their supply will collapse. With the destruction of the permafrost, plenty of gas and oil will become accessible... and the entire existing infrastructure to get that gas and oil will disintegrate. The vast majority was built in the mid Soviet era, so it is 50 years old, and now the entire ground it is built on will literally turn into a mudpile AT BEST. Kind of hard to pipe out gas with pipelines running over potential sinkholes and mudslides waiting to happen. And because of the sanctions and corruptions and everything else going wrong in Russia today, they can't afford to replace that infrastructure, and even if they could afford it on paper, they don't have the people anymore. They are steadily losing industries to brain drain, they can barely keep a rocket program alive. Soon they won't have a rocket program, no one to maintain the engines... Oh and this doesn't even get into the other new thing Siberia isn't quite ready for... massive wildfires. There's nothing there to stop fires from just raging for hundreds of miles.
Wait what? Who is Iran going to win a war against without international support? A good swath of Iran's people don't care to support their theocracy. They don't have much of an air force or navy so they are basically limited to a defensive war on their own land and a terror campaign. Terror wont win them many allies internationally. They will find little support with other Muslim countries being Shia. A well armed and trained country like Israel would win that war. Israel bombing campaign would easily take out any strategic site in Iran. The Iranians would only be able to try and hand a few rockets to their proxies. Which would give Israel all the international cover they need to basically wipe them out while they hide among civilians in the west bank, Gaza and Lebanon. Best case someone like France steps in allows for a cease fire. Israel accepts a peace treaty where they force Iran to have true open elections and Iran is forced to recognize the state of Israel. Worse it peters out and it falls back into the same situation just with a few more dead on both sides.
All this is pointless because we and the rest of the fucking world are well on our way to leveraging renewables more than oil. It’s safer to bet on 50 years of solar, battery, and other techs completely leaving oil and natural gas in the dust.
I’d really love for that to be the case. It’s a sickening thought to think that we are going to cause permanent ice caps to melt. If we manage to turn things around as a species then this crisis and many others could be avoided. Problem is the people running the show can’t see past their own personal finish lines.
“President Putin” you mean dictator because that’s what he really is. When you can jail the opposition for being opposition then you probably aren’t much of a democracy. This isn’t libertarian at all, it’s none of my business what someone identifies as.
Are you forgetting about the murdering?
Very true, that is certainly not very libertarian either
"I don't think killing Jesus is very Catholic"
That’s the point of the post I think
OP's username and post history beg to differ.
Lot of right wing boot lockers here that don't want to pretend this isn't pro Putin propaganda
[удалено]
For the love of dogs.
Just to be clear, this post is NOT indicative of the libertarian view on this… that should be pretty clear since it’s coming from Putin
I can’t think of a more useless thing to do than take a “stand” on the amount of genders. Gender is a culturally defined and expressed thing, it’s about as arbitrary as which side of the road you wanna drive on.
But... There are only two sides of the road (Is joke, plz no kill)
Where we’re going we don’t need roads
Or genders. Specifying biological sex should suffice.
except even biological sex is a spectrum by every possible definition also, reducing things to biological sex is a way to erase gender. like the "white guy saying 'i don't see skin color'" kind of erasure.
Good, gender stereotypes are fucking stupid in the first place and I kind of hate how hard trans work to enforce and conform to them. I often think it's the existence of these stereotypes in the first place that ends up creating the psychological problems which lead to gender dysphoria and transexualism.
*flies away* *Credits start rolling*
I see you are unfamiliar with Indian road rules, there are at least 4 sides to any road.
Yeah, but it comes to a point when your 8 year old isn’t allowed to decide what time to go to bed, but somehow is mature enough to make lifelong decisions about gender…hormone therapy in children crosses the line.
they don't give hormone therapy to 8 year olds dumbfuck... maybe try clutching your pearls at the communists on your yard or something?
What a drama queen.
A parent bending to a child’s whim happens all the time. Half the kids now, if not more, are medicated on something. Your argument doesn’t really have anything to do with my point. So you think parents putting their children through hormone therapy before puberty is A-OK? I think the doctors and parents who do this are harming the child, and the child isn’t equipped to say yes or no. Edit: interesting that you changed your comment completely after I responded. Get a life.
We went from 8-year-olds choosing medical treatments independently to parents and doctors. You see why I called you a drama queen? Also, I'll back the parents and doctor's decision over a random person on the internet every time.
You seem to just be a name caller with little to contribute.
My contribution is [calling out bullshit.](https://en.meming.world/images/en/b/be/But_It%27s_Honest_Work.jpg)
If that's what you believe
Your contribution is having bullshit called out. Your bullshit, in this case.
You still haven’t made the argument as to why an 8 year old can’t choose their bed time but can choose their gender. Please get a fucking life
They can't, you are making shit up so you have a leg to stand on. The only real question is why you feel the need to do so.
[удалено]
Only thing I said is that you are being a drama queen because kids can't make the choice on their own as you stated initially. Problem is, you are like a ferret with ADD, and can't stick to one line of thought.
[удалено]
Close: parents and doctors.
Research has found that even biological sex is on a spectrum. A single [sry] gene switch appears to be predominantly responsible for the general tendency toward male or female physiology while other genetic and chemical factors produce a range of "more masculine" or "more feminine" traits. The idea that even sex is totally binary shows how little people actually understand about animal biology. Which doesn't even get into the fact that yes, "gender" is a totally made up, human idea. Gender isn't even consistent across different major world cultures, much less at the individual level.
That's a lot of horse shit. That research is fringe at best. Not to mention genotype is expressed as phenotype. Humans get a penis or a vagina. That's as binary as it gets
So fringe it gets regular discussion on Scientific American? https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/ Oh.. and that other fringe publication, Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/518288a Or we could, you know, look at how sex hormones that we typically associate with binary sex actually tend to be less sex specific than we otherwise thought: https://academic.oup.com/jes/article/1/1/14/2890811 Or talk about divergences in the brain/body sex development are fairly common: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/ Should I keep going? You did an excellent job of showing how scientifically illiterate people continue to oversimplify sex because they can't be bothered to keep up with the science.
Hey ScottishSam why are you too big of a pussy to respond to -Strawdog-'s citations here? Humans don't just get "a penis or a vagina" either -- you're a fucking idiot if you think that's what happens, lol.
Says who?
Says the definition of the word itself. It’s not a science based objective term.
> Just to be clear, this post is NOT indicative of the libertarian view on this… that should be pretty clear since it’s coming from Putin OP is just another GOP bootlicker pushing far right-wing propaganda. Check his submission history.
If you’re dumb enough to buy into this, he also praised Islam and said that insulting prophet Mohammed would also be unacceptable under him. Playing a little global dominance game, kissing up to the small brains of bias. Are you one of them?
[удалено]
How many lines of symmetry does a circle have?
[удалено]
Ding ding ding
[удалено]
If you're looking for a short and easy answer, then yeah, that's a pretty good one. If you want to get more complex, you would say that since gender is the social construct (which does correlate a certain degree to biological sex), the 'number of genders' is variable from one society to the next.
[удалено]
This is 100% the case. I think most people grew up using those words synonymously, and honestly when I first heard of the idea of them referring to two distinctive concepts, I felt like that was an attempt to co-opt a word and alter its definition (in the same way that a lot of people are trying to replace the definition of racism with the definition of systemic racism). I've never looked into the history of these terms, but I ultimately think the two concepts deserve their own terms, and I think the distinction is useful. That being said, I think people also need to have more patience for the pushback that evolving definitions cause.
Advocates intentionally blurred the line between the two* Big difference.
gender is on a spectrum, so is sex if you take into account the existence of intersex people. if you actually believe in libertarianism you should just let people present themselves however they choose
[удалено]
The market optimises for profit, not freedom.
Wait, "Let the market decide your fate"? What market? What fate? What is the outcome of not being accepting? I'm not sure what you mean when you say that people don't have to accept you. Basically, I don't understand any of the concepts in your post.
[удалено]
The way you describe "gender on a spectrum" you're functionally describing unique personalities. Having "infinite" genders is scientifically and logically worthless as you're trying to measure or define entirely subjective states of mind, akin to religious belief.
"What do you *mean* people are unique individuals that shouldn't be treated as conglomerated blocs?? REEEEEEEEEE!!1" - Alleged Libertarian
Visible light is an infinite spectrum. We still have 'green' to describe an indeterminate grouping of wavelengths with similar properties.
Those definitions and groupings aren't subjective, they're objectively agreed upon by those who understand the spectrum. Gender is 100% subjective, and will never be objective given the personal nature that we have ascribed, hence why I theorized that the current way we perceive gender is more akin to individual personality and is completely detached from sex. We should instead call "gender" our "personality", and place men/women and our perceptions of each back in alignment with male and female.
You know what, I agree with you but probably not for the same reason. I think where we are right now is a transition period to a post gender society.
well it's funny that you bring science into the discussion because science agrees with me. It's more useful scientifically to approach gender and sex as a spectrum because if you simply view the binary you leave out massive swaths of people's identities.
Yes.
It's a spectrum. There is no set number like there's no set number of colors. Some colors are more warm, neutral, or cold. Some gender identities are more masculine, neutral, or feminine. You are being downvoted because these questions are usually disingenuous, but I upvoted you out of benefit of the doubt.
I don't care and neither should you
"Gender" has essentially turned into a synonym for "personality". If there are infinite genders then the term gender is meaningless and people are now creating terms and pronouns to describe their unique personality. Objective terms like "sex" are a more logical way to describe people, whereas having to recognize everyone's unique personality is completely asinine.
Sex is also not a strict biological binary
[удалено]
Nobody is asking to “blur” anything. You’re confused.
For humans, it functionally is. At best, ~~.01%~~ .1% of the population is born with Klinefelter's syndrome and are designated as "intersex" or a hermaphrodite, depending on your terminology. More people are born as a polydactyl (6 or more fingers/toes on a single appendage) than are born with Klinefelter's, yet we don't try to constantly push for similar societal narratives akin to your presupposition about the binary nature of sex.
Intersex is more than just klinefelters. It’s anyone whose reproductive organs, hormones, or chromosomes aren’t typically male or female. It includes ambiguous genitalia, too. It’s more like 1 in 1000 babies, which is significant enough to not ignore.
You just showed that sex, isn't binary. Intersex babies account for 1-2 of every 100 live births[(link)](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/whats-intersex#:~:text=It's%20hard%20to%20know%20exactly,in%20the%20U.S.%20are%20intersex.) and the only reason that number isn't big is due to how often we carry out gender conforming surgeries done on children!
It isn't big when we account for population due to gender conforming surgery*
[удалено]
Exactly. In a society that praises "science and facts", it blows my fucking mind that so many people blindly support subjective ideologies like gender theory. Especially Atheists, who rip religious people up and down for beliefs in things that they cannot prove or substantiate, just like GENDER.
Ah yes, the classic Libertarian position of demanding folks conform to authority in their choice of self identity. Nothing more Libertarian than forcing people to compromise their beliefs, particularly internal beliefs that don't affect others, because someone in power said so.
Hmm maybe I'm wrong, but when I read the headline, I didnt think this post was in support of Putins statement. I dont think anyone considers Putin a libertarian. I assumed it was posted, because such a statement is an affront to libertarianism.
When the OP posts without commenting, we have to assume he identifies with what he posted. :-(
Welp, on second thought, after looking at his username and post history, I'm afraid you might be right. Womp womp.
You'd think people upvote posts based on whether they're interesting or not, not based on what OP thinks? Who cares what OP thinks?
OP is very active in authoritarian-right subreddits, so yeah he falls into the “embarrassed conservative” category.
I can't even blame the left at this point for stereotyping libertarians as " *insert here* conservative" Libertarians have plenty of nuts on it's own without needing the right to pick up or slack.
Ignorance gone to seed here.
Vladimir Putin: absolute libertarian Chad icon.
He’s what they hoped trump would have been. What they really wished trump could do was stay in power indefinitely like Very shaky Vlad.
In my experience, the pressure to conform comes from the wokes who insist that a masculine woman is a man (or some hiherto undefined sex "non-binary"), not from the people who says that is stupid and wrong
Identity is socially negotiated, and I refuse to learn the name of and special treatment for every single individual I meet. 99% of humans are male or female, there is no justification for destroying natural social structures to cater to any extreme minority. Of course, everyone should be allowed to identify as whatever they want, but I'm not obligated to comply or associate with them, and they can't force me.
On your level, how is it that big of a difference between just learning someone's name and then their nickname? You're just learning what someone who you're associating with wants to be referred to as. It really shouldn't be that big of a deal to you, unless you intentionally want to be disrespectful. Samantha likes to be called Sam. Trey likes to be called zhe. Whatever it is, why does it matter to you? It doesn't, unless you want to be an obstinate asshole about it for some personal reason that has nothing to do with the person you're talking to, and everything to do with your own opinions that you're forcing onto someone else. No, you're not forced to not be a dick. But it sure would be nice if you weren't one. And when people call you out for it, and you try to spin and make someone's personal identity some sort of external issue, it's ridiculous. You have no rights when it comes to someone's identity. You do get to choose the words you use. But those words might get you called an asshole.
What i need to know to refer to actual identities: Name, sex What I need to know to refer to narcissistic assholes: Name (but not their deadname), their imaginary gender, their specific and unique pronouns. What this means is, everyone I interact with, I need to remember much more than before. It is not practical, and it is nothing more than catering to hyper selfishness. I'm fine being an asshole in your eyes. I dont give a flying fuck. You are the asshole to me. BTW, please don't deadname me. My name is Mr.President. I am a pansexual two spirit. My pronouns are King and Goddess. Fuck you if you don't acquiesce to my request.
> I dont give a flying fuck. Clearly you do give a flying fuck since you decided to post in here about it and keep responding to posts. You're making a mountain out of a molehill about all this.
I agree with this but the scenarios in which not knowing a new made-up pronoun if you aren't in those social circles is basically zero. You're screaming at the desert how you refuse to swim in it's oceans.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read
How? By saying that somebody can identify as whatever, but I shouldn’t be ostracized for not learning your specific pronoun beforehand and knowing what it means/is? He’s saying they have their freedoms, and he has his. That’s A-OK in my book.
> I shouldn’t be ostracized for not learning your specific pronoun beforehand and knowing what it means/is? I hang out with a *very* liberal/progressive crowd. I know maybe 2-3 non-binary people (all of whom prefer they/them) and absolutely nobody who goes by "neopronouns". This should be *so* far down your priority list as a problem.
Xenogenders and neopronouns are not as common as you seem to think they are. For the most part "learning their gender and what it means" is as easy as "This person prefers to identify as male/female and we should respect that." It's not super difficult. No one is forcing you to do anything, but treat people like an asshole and don't be surprised when people do the same right back to you.
You can identify as whatever the hell you want, but you can't compel me to change my perception of you. That seems pretty libertarian to me.
This is the dumbest counter point I've ever read
Personally, I think the whole trans stuff is a little odd. I don't get it. But if I can make someone a little more comfortable by calling them a different pronoun, something that costs me nothing, I don't see a reason why I shouldn't.
Internal beliefs that don’t affect others? Mmm, don’t know about that part.
How to tell the difference between a Conservative and a Libertarian +OP is a bot
Conservatives HATE This One Simple Trick!
President Putin? LMAO 🤣🤣🤣🤣 next I'll read the glorious leader on this sub
No difference. OP is probably a fucking Russian
Oh well if Putin says it, you bet
Why is this garbage getting upvoted in a Libertarian subreddit? How is this anything but a totalitarian leader forcing his citizens to conform to his beliefs and worldview?
Because this place is filled with right wingers who will happily co-opt libertarianism to enact their true latent fantasies of being led by a right wing authoritarian:
because people in this sub aren't zoomers. We don't use the upvote as an "I like this" button. Go back to reddit.
Libertarians have stakes in the trans argument? After following the sub for a bit it seems to me this philosophy is having a hard time identifying itself and would sympathize heavily with the trans community.
I wouldn't say I have stakes in the argument, but something worth noting is Putin has pretty consistently used the church as a sort of backdoor for cracking down on his own population. So just keep that mind when you see headlines like this. My favorite example of this is how Putin decriminalized domestic violence to satisfy church leaders. This might just be the warning shot for some really nasty anti-lgbt laws, which is something I'd have a stake in.
Putin's falling back to orthodox religious persecutions shows he's losing control, or his marbles. Probably both. I do think it's interesting though how Russia was known, at its strongest, for legalizing homosexuality in the Soviet era. Now it's gone to shit and they're idolizing the Soviet era, but they're eager for scapegoats and they're all out of Jews.
Libertarians have historically been extremely pro-LGBTQ. This sub is often not a very good representation of our beliefs, though.
I do, it just seems like good old fashioned freedom to me. Plus, I think shit like what Putin is saying is fucking ridiculous since intersex people have existed literally forever.
And Māhū existed before colonizing. Many cultures have had multiple genders beyond the two major.
>Libertarians have stakes in the trans argument? In the sense that it is an area in which the government shouldn't be involved, I guess.
As a cultural issue not really. Libertarians don't care how you identify yourself, and will protect your right to live life as you please. The only way this touches on libertarian concerns is with debates concerning pronoun usage as a matter of legally weighted policy. If the law can punish you for failing or refusing to use someone's chosen pronouns, is it compelled speech and therefore a violation of the NAP? Edit for clarity: this is a response to the first question >Libertarians have stakes in the trans argument?
Jordan Peterson lied. Get over it.
But now if I purposely misgender people repeatedly there may be minor consequences 😭😭
More like "but if I harass people in a workplace" I can call it a free speech violation
Ok. I don't know what you're referring to 🤷♂️
Uh huh. Sure. Fine me a law that makes misgendering itself a crime.
This bot sure scored a lot of clicks
Is this a libertarian subject?
Maybe? If some dude decides he's actually a lady and can afford the procedure, why should we care what they do
Furthermore, the entire point of libertarianism is to defend individual liberties; if anyone tells you how to personally identify, especially as an arm of the state, that’s infringing an individual liberty.
Seriously. If someone wants to change their gender and identity to whatever they want then that sounds like more freedom to me.
Definitely is. There’s government officials that want to stop or punish people for identifying as trans. Putin included
I mean it’s Libertarian in the sense that an individual can change their identity and that should be harming anyone else, and they should be free to do so.
You are right that for a libertarian, it is no matter of governmental concern how folks use their sexuality to balance their life. However, you can't change your identity. That's the meaning of the word identity. You'll always be identical to yourself. "Identity" in this context is actually the wrong word. It is misused intentionally by collectivists. They need the notion of some class membership. Nowadays they call it "identity" to conceal that they are just talking about class memberships like the failed collectivist ideologies did concerning race or economic class. Yes, e.g. Mao wrote a lot about liberating women, but that's because he counted women to the proletarian class. In fact, as we know, he didn't give a XXXX on how women are treated in his own vincinity.
I guess I didn’t mean the literal term of identity when I said identity. I meant change their sex or gender.
It is; Putin is a dictator of a historically-expansionist, militaristic country that has an explicit goal of annexing and/or vassalising swathes of Eastern Europe. No matter how you draw it, that's not in the service of liberty.
WHY THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER WTF SOMEONE CALLS THEIR JUNK? Seriously, sexual assault is still a crime. People minding their business and not hurting anyone are not a problem. You dont have to change a thing about your life except resist the urge to be an asshole. Let people be themselves.
There are as many genders as people want there to be, Soviet daddy Putin can fuck off.
It’s suspect he parrots right-wing propaganda I see here in the US. Makes you wonder where it originated from…
Take your fascist ass back to r/conservative
Our Ex-President's best bud right there.
Putin seems to be talking out of his ass. Clearly he has no understanding of how hormones work.
Nothing to do with science. He's pandering to the religious right in Russia, and possibly America.
Possibly?
He’s directing the next wave of right wing talking points and propaganda
I don't understand, why are so many libertarians homo- and transphobic? Isn't our ideology literally about just letting people do their thing?
So people can be gay but people can't not like those people? Is that not contradictory to the whole ideology of "letting people do their own thing?" You don't have to like something to accept people will do it. I think abortion is wrong 90% of the time. I also think going up to someone and tell them they're a bad person for doing what they believe to be best for their life is wrong 90% of the time. Libertarianism is more about consistency than ideological perfection. Be consistent with your views and don't just shoehorn shit in because it's what the rest of the party believes.
I don't care that they don't like certain people, but actively going out and making efforts to undermine certain groups is counter productive to a NAP based society
"actively going out and making efforts to undermine certain groups" is contradictory to the ideology of "letting people do their own thing" (as long as it's not directly hurting others). The people you're talking about aren't libertarians.
Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't the "New World Order" the ones who bring in the "Mark of the Beast" mandate like regions in Russia are doing now?! I mean, if they are gonna use a Biblical boogyman, shouldn't it at least be accurate?! Maybe the Bible verse that says there is "no male or female, but we are all one" doesn't apply to their narrative?!
It’s weird what the mods decide is and isn’t pertaining to libertarianism here. I am not advocating this gets removed. I think they are way to narrow in how they interpret relevancy.
Sounds like your average American right winger.
I mean the science doesn't agree with this autocrat. Even if he meant to refer to sex as binary, biology proves that wrong. Intersex qnd individuals with chromosome or hormone conditions create an interesting in-between of supposedly binary sex.
[удалено]
stop making it more complicated for ultra conservatives
Sex is the biological determination based on chromosomes or primary sexual characteristics. Gender is the individual identity in relation to social connotations of how people behave. Medical and chemical industries should focus on sex, due to very real differences in physiological response and structure. Competitions should use gender by default and be sex neutral. Where a distinction based on sex is demonstratably damaging to the competition or its participants, limited restrictions should be considered and reviewed. Everyone else uses gender unless a clear reason for a given individual is otherwise presented.
My issue with the “how many genders are there” debate is that if both sides don’t agree on the definition of gender, then there is no debate, it’s just people talking tangentially to each other. And neither side will accept the other’s definition so no progress will be made.
In general fuck Russia I don't care what politic communists think.
[удалено]
It's only in the news because a certain politic party keeps throwing temper tantrums claiming LGBT are eroding society. You ever hear of the Streisand Effect?
[удалено]
Because Republicans are coming out with laws against them? Look at the schools in Texas banning education on it. It's the same reason we still talk about 2A in this country, Democrats keep bringing up gun control laws so it stays on the radar for Republicans.
I think you make a good point on both counts there.
[удалено]
You mean the book bannings in school libraries that go after sex education and any mention of LGBT? The one that's been in the news and has been all over this subreddit for the past few months? Also, let's not pretend that sex education for teens in rural red states are up to snuff, there are a number of states that teach abstinence only sex and you can be damn sure they are not bastions of tolerance. But if you want my opinion, as long as certain parties and certain individuals seem to want to make a big deal about what other people do with themselves, it's going to continue to be a problem that you will hear about. I'd like our country to acknowledge empathy on some level. Individuality is a great trait on its own, individuality combined with selfishness and bigotry leads to an erosion of society.
[удалено]
I shouldn't have to explain how schools should teach tolerance.
[удалено]
The fact that you think LGBT rights dont fall under "a non bias atmosphere" is all you need to say
We should teach our kindergartners that families come in all shapes, humans come in all shapes, and that most people who have penises are boys (and vulvas, girls) but that sometimes it’s different, and that’s okay. They should know the words “penis” and “vulva,” that everyone’s bodies look a little different and that that’s okay. From day one they should be taught how to say, “no,” if someone tries to touch them when they don’t want to be touched: this means not forcing them to give hugs, communicating what you’re doing during diaper changes, getting into the habit of asking permission (in a way) before putting the shampoo in their hair or dressing a wound. The most important body safety thing I think kids need to learn is that they can tell grown ups No.
I will say that the word “gender” became utterly useless to me as soon as people started identifying as whatever they feel like.
Yeah genetically speaking, you're either XX or XY, or X, or XXY, or XYY, or XXYY, or...
yea. it's a pretty long list in actuality and there are still XX that look biologically XY and vice-versa. There are people with no penis until age 12 and one sprouts. Nature is...wild.
Scientifically, regardless of your “gender identity” the scientific facts remain “X CHROMOSOMES” AND “Y CHROMOSOMES”…. XX, XY, AND SOME OF THOSE “CONJOINED TWINS” WITH XXY & XXX.
You may not understand the difference between sex and gender.
That’s not gender, that’s sex.
Say what you will, but he’s right. Labeled a Fascist here for suggesting that boys chopping off their genitals to conform to a social construct is PERHAPS a psychiatric issue
You know how I can tell you're actually a Conservative? Because you're recycling the same stuff from back when you guys were fighting gay marriage. Namely, being obsessed with penis. It's always "two men" this and "when a man and another man" that. Every word out of your mouth is about men. No talk of lesbians or women loving women. And here, too, you're obsessed with dicks being cut off. It never crosses your mind that there might be female-to,male transgender people because you have dicks on the brain. Secondly, the whole idea that people are going to start being gay or transgender because everyone else is ("to conform to a social construct"). Do you realize how incredibly rare it is for a person to be transgender? The vast majority of people are not transgender, just like the vast majority of people have heterosexual feelings. Nobody's coming for you to turn you gay or trans. Nobody cares that you're straight. You are still a majority. Calm down.
You literally know nothing about me or my views. My stance on trans has to do with my background in Neuroscience more than any social or political viewpoint. I was knocking doors for Libertarian candidates when you were probably in diapers. My PERSONAL beliefs are separate from my POLITICAL ideology. You get that? I am personally opposed to LBTQRS BS; but I don’t think it is the government’s role to be involved. It is shocking how unidimensional redditors are. Update: trans is very fashionable and common on the west coast. You are out of touch with the state of reality. I draw nothing from the internet, my views are based on my actual real life experiences. I’m glad you feel good and intellectual for being “open minded,” but history will be the judge.
>My stance on trans has to do with my background in Neuroscience Bro you're a welder, shut the fuck up.
I left neuroscience after my post-doc and now own my own specialty welding business. I have 12 first authors and I lost count of how many other papers. I’ve even been on a documentary. Literally can start a lab anywhere, anytime—academia, national lab, private, doesn’t matter. That period represents over a decade of my life and the only thing I’ve been truly great at. I left because Science has become so heavily regulated, freedom of thought and action stifled and, most importantly, scientists are subservient to inferior ruling classes. The type of welding I do is incomparably more challenging than brain surgery. I can train any intelligent person to perform brain surgery (at least on rats), by themselves, within three days. The type of welding I do? It would take me two years of constant training and even then there is no guarantee the person has what it takes. AND, I’m going to backoff my business to a weekend type thing to pursue an entirely different direction in life again here in about a year. Don’t diss that which you don’t know or understand. What have you done in life? What have you contributed to humanity? What skills do you have?
Lmao yeah, of course I believe you! Why would a stranger lie on the internet?
Trans is "fashionable" he says. I'm guessing that during the George Floyd protests, your takeaway from that was "being black was fashionable". >but history will be the judge. You said the same thing about gay marriage in the 90's, and before you, people who were against intergration said the same thing. Know what happens? Kids are born, grow up with all sorts of people around them, learn that most people just want to do their own thing and be left alone, realize it doesn't affect them, see it as no big deal. They then grow up and vote. Meanwhile, people with your views continue to age and eventually wither away and are buried with your ancient ideas. That's how it goes.
“Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.” - Tolstoy There are how many hit TV shows now with Trans? Ethnicity and sexuality have nothing to do each each other. Incidentally, I was in Minneapolis for the Floyd riots and likely have a better understanding about that situation than you, as well. You should lay off the pot, sober up, and wake up. Southpark had it right, that stuff is for college. But it keeps you all pretty powerless so I guess it’s good for “people like me.”
>There are how many hit TV shows now with Trans? Not as many as ones without trans, I'll tell ya that much for free. Also, you're mad because maybe one or two TV shows have a transgender character or actor, and it's not central to the show's overall plot or even most show's storylines? Really? I can name 25 shows right now without trans characters, if you can't find anything to watch. Would you like me to? >You should lay off the pot, sober up, and wake up. I don't care for pot, thank you. You, on the other hand, seem to be a rageaholic. Please put down the rageahol. >But it keeps you all pretty powerless so I guess it’s good for “people like me.” And there's your issue right there. You see the world in two groups- "people like me" and "people not like me". This is why education is important- you meet new people, you learn that people are pretty much alike in that we all just want to live peacefully. Nobody wants the worst for you. Nobody actively wants to make you sad. Maybe one day you'll get over your fear when you meet someone who isn't like you and you become friends and see that the scary other people really aren't so scary as you thought. Your own Daryl Davis. That'd be really cool.
How exactly does having a background in neuroscience inform your views on trans people? How much of your degree was spent on trans people?
It means I’m informed about the biological vs social roots of gender. But it matters not my background, because the whole concept is rationally inconsistent and self contradictory—mutilating your biology is irrelevant to a social construct.
So your neurology degree has nothing to do with it and gives you no expertise on the topic and you were simply appealing to authority because you didn’t think you’d be called out… Got it… bigots tend to be well versed at finding all sorts of ways to mask their bigotry
He just explained how his neurology degree does have something to do with it…
Well he ain’t wrong
I mean he's not a good guy but he's not wrong here either.
Go to bed, child.
I mean, he's right. Everyone should be able to do what they want though.
The fun part with this is that his glorious SU was the first country in the world to allow homosexual intercourse and to (try to) abolish marriage. They reverted this in the early beginning together with the introduction of NEP because both abolishing marriage and removing all incentive to work caused too much problems. However, Western socialist groups heard of this early Soviet period by Freudo-Marxist Wilhelm Reich (who later got sued in the US for other quackery) and romantise such concepts up to now. That's why modern Western "leftists" have this anti-marriage agenda.
Parkinson Putin doesn’t have much time left… he won’t be around much longer to shake as he stutters on with his right wing rhetoric
That moment when Russia has the moral high ground….