justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
Trump won the presidency again so I have eclipsed beyond caring lol also I am not a man and yes I do get whipped with sugar cane by Nancy Pelosi and AOC on Sundays instead of going to church.
User ID: 2254
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
3d ago
My long, long road to curing my dysthymia may be coming to an end this year. Me and my doctor increased my dose of Wellbutrin to 300mg while keeping my sertraline at 100mg. The hope is that together they will carry the last of the chemical leg over the finish line, and that combined with the non-medicinal treatments might finally cure me of this stupid disorder that's been an absolute monkey on my back.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
Yes, I'd like a list of names of people you believe are enforcing wokeness.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
The very beginning of the article define "The Cathedral" as "journalism plus academia". That's pretty specific to me. In fact I scrolled further and found even more specifically "Harvard, Yale, the Times and the Post". In your own example, you listed a line of bureaucracy from lawyers to lawfare to companies.
However I am going to assume you are also implying that even if the article is not being specific, your definition of the Cathedral still holds. Your second claim that "everyone knows that "they" will get you" is consensus building. Who is "everyone"? Does that include me?
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
I’m not confused lol, I very much think you are wrong, but in the spirit of debate, I’d like to discuss specifics. Specifically, who is “they” that have dominated “western politics”? Is it the president? The Supreme Court? The circuit courts? The governors? The school boards? The voters? The entire Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches of government?
I’ll illustrate an example; when I say “the people who think our main problems are caused by Oppressors organizing society to keep the oppressed under their heel from a movement that has dominated western politics for a decade”, those people in particular would be Greg Abbott, Ken Paxton, Ron Desantis, Majorie Taylor Greene, Mike Johnson and Donald Trump, to name a few.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
Do you believe people who enter a building that the police tell them not to enter are not breaking the law?
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
I looked up "soothing, nurturing euphemisms" and got "rest your mind," "take a moment," "breathe easy," "unwind," "decompress," "let go," "find your center," "peaceful pause," "quiet time," "soothe your soul," "gentle transition," "calm your nerves," "ease into relaxation," "soft landing," and "tranquil space." If the claim is that men don't use these phrases, I find that dubious.
Additionally, I don't consider definitions of environments, moves and policies to be a part of defining language.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
"Please Just Fucking Tell Me What Term I Am Allowed to Use for the Sweeping Social and Political Changes You Demand, you don't get to insist that no one talks about your political project and it's weak and pathetic that you think you do"? Or is it "the basic stance of the social justice set, for a long time now, has been that they are 100% exempt from ordinary politics." Who is "they"?
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
Well, if you are succumbing to labeling anything you consider bad as woke and everything else as something else...I don't know how to argue on that except...don't?
If the question is "wokeness is receding", and you define wokeness as "all discrepancies of outcome are due to pervasive, systemic biases rooted in unchanging, historically-defined oppressor/oppressed dynamics, and such dynamics outweigh most or all other concerns", I struggle to see where claims that a discrepancy is due to biased dyanmics and not merit are, in general, going down. Mark Zuckerburg just claimed that the bias he struggles with in his business is because of the overabundance of "feminine energy"; I hardly see that as symptoms of a decline.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
I don't think I can successfully steelman an argument if I don't know the OP's argument, but I will try. It'll just be a lot of assumptions, which I'm not a fan of.
The position is that there are two binary expressions of gender, which masculine and feminine, and therefore there are two categories of language corresponding. Additionally, the correct expression of this binary is the Western definition of masculinity and femininity.
This is natural; two completely different species attempting to communicate with eachother naturally will have separate languages, complete with their own vocabulary, grammar, connotations and implications. Since virtually all first world countries are Western, it shows that the Western definition of masculinity and femininity is the most successful, and therefore accurate, definition.
If we follow the examples of the Western definition of masculinity and femininity, then, we can assume what OP means by feminine language is language that is "collective, random, accommodating, passive, vulnerable, emotional, fragile, small, dependent, intuitive, submissive" and "tactful", among others.
Now, seeing as I have seen a fair share of men identifying with the Western definition of masculine and use language that is random, passive, emotional, fragile and tactful, then that language can't be exclusively feminine then. And if there is no exclusivity to the language and both elements can be included with one another, then the definitions of "feminine language" have become so vague as to render the whole notion non-existent.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
Gag? I'm not going to continue conversation with someone who can't restrain themselves from insulting me.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
What is "feminine language"?
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
I agree. I’d say Trump pardoning people who deliberately and illegally entered government property is performative social justice. What economic/political/social opportunity and right is being denied by jailing people who literally broke the law?
Therefore the claim that “wokeness” is on the letdown seems false.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
Can you give me some examples of what you consider to be aggressively performative economic, political and social rights & opportunities?
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
7d ago
What is wokeness, specifically?
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
I wish again I could properly express my sincerity when I say your-this response is very much in line with the kind of conversation I am looking for and I am verily satisfied and optimistic. I made specific claims and feel you are directly addressing them, therefore listening to me, and continuing the conversation yadda yadda. That's the best anyone can ask for on this forum.
"You think it does, I think it doesn't. C'est la vie."
and
"This is an obvious strawman"
and
"the question, "Is it reasonable to ask the question, 'Do leftists care about child rape,' and it is it reasonable to answer it with 'No?'" and these are 2 fundamentally different questions and you are eliding between the two."
and
"the words you added to your synopsis of my comment fundamentally changed the meaning of my comment."
and
"Where did you ask this question?"
are all elements of your response I think are valid and worth time and attention to answer because they are, at least to me, objective rigor and commentary. Unfortunately, I just don't want to do that right now and likely won't in the future if I don't now in this response. And honestly, if I'm not willing to take the time to respond to your points the way I want you to respond to mine then the onus is on me to concede and take responsibility for inappropriately closing the argument. My apologies for the frustration, -50 points to house Leftist, I shouldn't start debates if I'm not willing to see them to the end. Since I am not responding to your points, I think it is fair to say you are correct. I dunno, if I say, "Cats don't drink milk." and you say, "Yes they do." and then I run off without responding, the winner that's left is "yes they do" unless I come back and pick back up the argument.
Anyway, long-winded way of thank you for responding, sorry, I'm wrong, and trying my best to point big arrow signs that say "THIS IS WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR".
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
Then it looks like the moderation on this site isn't for me. If your intent is for this site to be "a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases", then when two people are clearly not on the same page about what "shady thinking", much less what counts as "responding", is, the only person who had the authority to provide guidance is you. I thought this place was trying to consider itself a debate club and like any, any debate platform, there has to be a moderator to keep the conversation from getting derailed, otherwise, yes, it devolves into trying to parse out and agree on what the hell the other person is even saying. By you not checking that 07mk is actually responding to what I'm saying, you're signaling that other users can get away with the same behavior I'm pointing out. Nobody wants to argue with someone they think isn't listening to them, so all that you have left is an echochamber.
That is to say, I do feel like you are listening to me in this particular response, and your answer is "Hell no." I wish I knew a way to illustrate the full sincerity of when I say that is perfectly acceptable to me. I don't want to moderate this site, you do, and I appreciate a succinct and clear answer.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
SteveKirk, why do you keep making unnecessary little zingers like "all their little tricks are so clever"? I could also do a little zinger along the lines of, "watch out, they're trying to make you gargle sand again", but that is escalation and devolves the conversation and this isn't the place for that. I don't understand what you want out of the forum if, seemingly, all you want to do is make little barbs at leftists that piss them off and goad them into stinging you and derail the conversation.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
I seriously think "Mod's Choice" AAQC is a really great idea. It shows what the moderators of the site are looking for while giving out that sweet internet recognition that encourages people to make more posts like the AAQC. Or people can just ignore it and go for the mass-approval AAQCs and still feel satisfied their contributions are being recognized.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
I agree, having sex with someone who lied to you isn't practicing safe sex. But then, does the argument "prep is a drug for gay people to attend orgies because they keep having sex with people who lie to them" valid from my example? No. Firstly, because it's anecdotal, and secondly, the anecdotal evidence already contradicts your claim that prep can "easily be replaced by safe sex practices". Do you believe my roommate is responsible for his boyfriend lying about getting tested? Because I don't think so.
I don't know what you're trying to say with the second part there. Exactly how is "having sex with someone who thinks talking about HIV is a boner killer" not practicing safe sex? Unless you're trying to say, "your roommate not telling people at the club he hooks up with he has HIV because it's a boner killer isn't practicing safe sex", in which I would agree that isn't practicing safe sex, but...that's not what I said my roommate was doing. I said the prospect of getting rejected repeatedly by potential hookups who do not want to have conversations about taking PREP was adversely affecting his mental health and that he was, in fact, practicing safe sex by not going to a place where the proper thing to do is explain his medical status.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
This is a very kind thing to say on a site like this, thank you for the compliment.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
It is intimately refreshing to read what you're saying because I agree wholeheartedly, except that it can't be solved by moderation. I believe moderation can solve it by setting the trend. If we can all agree what "not responding to eachother" looks like, or "debate fallacies", or "poor standard of discussion", which I think we can do, then we can start calling each-other out on it and only resort to mods for reinforcement/clarification. I swear on my pinky toe the same problem would be here if there was a healthy leftist population.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
Yes, it is my subjective opinion on moderation. I am trying to prove said subjective opinion in the most objective way I can think of. I write the report, I send it to my boss, and I've done my job. What you and the mods do with said report is not in my metaphorical pay grade to be concerned about. I'll gather my data and write some paragraphs trying to summarize it and if ya'll think it's bogus, uh. Idk, you're asking me for proof, I'm gonna whip up the proof, and if it just comes down to plain "I think this, you think that", like, that's fine. It just means the moderation on this site isn't for me.
And no, oh my Lord, I do not expect you guys to add all that extra work. I feel like I am saying these things and they're not being heard. I literally acknowledged and will do so again that ya'll are a small mod team and cannot afford extra work, so if I am going to propose a solution, it needs to be concise, factor in labor effort, and be achievable with the small team ya'll have. With your example, yes, I would like for the mods to say something like that, but no, it's not feasible to do with every single disagreement, so it should only be used when it's really necessary so as not to eat up mods' time, so there needs to be some kind of colloquially agreed upon terminology that is easily identifiable.
You think @07mk responded to what I said. I think he didn't, and also that a lot of other people just generally don't on this site in general. I would like to gather my evidence to convince you he-and-they didn't. Then after that if you still think he responded to what I said, that's totally fair. Sometimes it just does come down to "I don't agree". But at least I did my part in trying to put my money where my mouth is.
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
Okay, well I think you're wrong in thinking that the charity rule means posting baileys (leftists don't care about child rape) instead of mottes (policies that leftists champion lead to child rape) is acceptable. This site is...literally called the Motte. "It's obvious this is what I'm saying" is literally the shady thinking we are trying to avoid. It's the exact same poor debating as what antifa is doing.
I mean, this debate started because you said "I don't find either of your examples to be anywhere near the level of dunking or the vitriol that's displayed by antifa here because the question of whether or not leftists care about child rape isn't pleasant, nor is it nice, but it's a real question that can be honestly, in good faith, answered as "No." because when I was a younger, more naive leftist, I genuinely didn't care about child rape or other potential negative consequences of unmitigated immigration." therefore the comment here by antifa, and IME the occasional leftists who come in "hot" here, are basically pure shit with perhaps some bones and ligaments there, whereas the comments left by right-wingers are not."
I responded with, "I don't think you can answer "do leftists care about child rape" with your own anecdotal evidence, because anecdotal evidence is bad on its own. Do you agree that anecdotal evidence is bad on its own, and do you have other evidence that "leftists don't care about child rape" other than anecdotal?"
You responded with "I'm not saying every leftist doesn't care about child rape, I'm saying leftists would absolutely, 100%, honestly, in good faith believe they care about it, but their lack of curiosity in actually checking if their beliefs about reality are correct shows that their belief about what they care about is incorrect. And, additionally, my anecdotal evidence stands because I was no means being an unusual leftist as someone who openly said that, if allowing in poor people that Republicans dislike into our country also means that some of those poor people will do things like rape more children in the USA, then so be it."
I responded with, "Okay, but why are you not saying what you think then? There is a world of difference between "leftists don't care about child rape" and "leftists are unwilling to look at the true ramifications of their policies and therefore don't actually care about the results". Additionally, you haven't responded to my claim anecdotal evidence on its own isn't valid, much less my question if you have any other evidence than that, you just repeated your anecdote, which I assume means you think that type of data is valid and you don't have that evidence, but then can you say that out loud so we can move on?"
And now it seems you don't know what we are debating about, as you said "whatever debate we're having". This is what I mean. I believe your bad debating habits have derailed the conversation. Your actual point was not "saying leftists don't care about child rape is valid", it was "I don't find either of your examples to be anywhere near the level of dunking or the vitriol that's displayed by antifa here." I think my examples do support my claim which wasn't and isn't even that there is too much vitrol and dunking on leftists but that debate fallacies were derailing conversations and driving away leftists because the mods have an unrecognized bias towards these debate fallacies.
This is where I would like some type of mod action that is similar to debate moderators, in which a clear direction of, "07mk, you are talking about this, and justawoman, you are talking about that. Respond to eachother so this debate can be productive instead of a bunch of hot air."
justawoman
Bernie Sanders is my personal gimp
11d ago
I replied downthread the proposed solution and went into detail. I genuinely am asking if you have read it? The one about statistics and me collecting a data pool? I feel like it has answers already to these questions on it, and no! It's not going ban crazy, and it's not using up all your energy to proof-read.
Otherwise, concretely, I want you guys to be able to identify the debate fallacies going on and tell the users who are utilizing them to knock it off so that legitimate debate can be had and you're not driving off the leftists that you want. In your first example with 07mk, is a great one; no, I think he did not respond to what I said. I first posited a) their claim about leftists' attitude on child rape couldn't be substantiated with just anecdotal evidence and b) did they have any evidence other than anecdotal. Neither of those points were addressed in their response. To me, appropriate mod action would be something along the lines of "07mk, you cannot expect justawoman to continue the conversation if you don't continue it appropriately. Please respond to her two claims a) Do you think such a claim can be substantive on anecdotal evidence and b) do you have evidence other than anecdotal, then move on to the next claim." I said in my response earlier I would be happy to document these things privately so that I had data to back my claims and also to point out these general trends and condense them into a sentence or two so that the small mod team here has concrete examples to look out for.
The MOST useful thing was reading “Running on Empty” and “Adult Children of Emotionally Immature Parents”. I wish I could make the both books required reading in school lol, but Running on Empty really did change my life. By using example after example to validate my experiences, I was able to start putting names to feelings I’d felt for a long time but had ignored, which led to a proper diagnosis from my doctors that had a road to recovery. Those books, in my opinion, are cheats to life hahaha.
In second place would be the three-month outpatient program for drug addiction that broke down what’s running under the hood when it comes to addiction and learning the H.A.L.T method. H.A.L.T rocks.
Third would be the two short stories “A Short Stay In Hell” and “The Divine Farce”. They were incredibly inspirational to me as stories about the tenacity of the human spirit. Even if I were locked in a small tube with pear juice and shit dripping all over me, I’d still be okay. Helps keep the motivation up when I feel like I’m not making the progress I want to make.
Third would be smoothies. Lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of smoothies, with two scoops of Benefiber. Cold, light foods are a-must when your stomach is a pit of sinking feelings and smoothies can bypass that, at least for me.
Fourth is sobriety of all caffeine, nicotine, marijuana and alcohol. It sucks boo-hoo but it kept my mind clear so I could focus on the problem and more importantly when it was showing it’s ugly head so I could use H.A.L.T. It’s hard to tell if I’m angry or hungry when I’m buzzed.
Fifth is ruthlessly ending friendships and relationships with people I did not feel I could be authentic with. The criteria was, “If I feel like I can’t express my authentic reaction to this person, then I can’t be around them.” Cry about it really bad, then do it. It really, truly is better to be alone than to have bad friends, if nothing else than the boredom of forcing yourself to feel your loneliness will inspire you to move towards making new ones.
More options
Context Copy link