It's gender critical coming out day

[Metaphor]

I can say the quiet part out loud, too, but I'll let someone else take a crack first for a bit. Cheers.

I don't know what Patooka meant by his post, but I suspect he meant to say 'being gender critical is the same as being racist'. But I don't want to put words in his mouth.

Then he would have said 'racists feel the same way.'

Patooka can explain what he meant if he wants to. I don't know what he meant and I don't want to put words in his mouth.

 

[Patooka]

I can say the quiet part out loud, too, but I'll let someone else take a crack first for a bit. Cheers.

I don't know what Patooka meant by his post, but I suspect he meant to say 'being gender critical is the same as being racist'. But I don't want to put words in his mouth.

Then he would have said 'racists feel the same way.'

I don't know; apparently there is a rumour going around that I am fucking subtle and nuanced and shit. I swear to Christ if I find the cunt who started that that I will fucking end them. Just so we're clear - I don't think Metaphor is racist. I'm sorry this is so confusing for some people. I'm certain everybody else got the point.

 

[Jarhyn]

I can say the quiet part out loud, too, but I'll let someone else take a crack first for a bit. Cheers.

I don't know what Patooka meant by his post, but I suspect he meant to say 'being gender critical is the same as being racist'. But I don't want to put words in his mouth.

Then he would have said 'racists feel the same way.'

Patooka can explain what he meant if he wants to. I don't know what he meant and I don't want to put words in his mouth.

Patooka themselves has made every indication that it is their intent that the reader figure it out, and a few readers have... Oh, while I was typing this up, Patooka said as much..

No, the ability to get 23 chromosomes into an egg and supply it with the right butrients matters in terms of which adults can reproduce with other adults. If we want to get right down to it.

Certain chemical precursors matter to disease progression. Sometimes those precursors are directly delivered by gonads and sometimes they are not. What matters is the actual precursor, not "the sex".

Testosterone exposure matters to upper body strength. Testicles are not muscles and muscles are not testicles. It is a chemical, not disparate far removed cells that make this happen. It happens without the cells, with just the chemical.

Certainly, some things are close to sex. But they are not sex exactly.

You cannot just snap your fingers and have all these things BE sex no matter how close they are.

I did not say they were sex. I said sex matters, because it does.

Except it doesn't. Sex can be an easy way to achieve these things but sex is neither necessary nor sufficient in the end.

It is necessary that a person has to be a particular sex for me to be attracted to them sexually.

I know your church preaches against this but I don't belong to your church.

Ah. There we go. Still not sufficient, and still not contextually important. Probably not even really actually necessary, but we may never know

Sex is the easy way around the horn.

Either way I don't want to know who you want to fuck, or who you think other people may want to fuck. Normal polite people don't bring fucking into normal polite contexts

 

[Metaphor]

I can say the quiet part out loud, too, but I'll let someone else take a crack first for a bit. Cheers.

I don't know what Patooka meant by his post, but I suspect he meant to say 'being gender critical is the same as being racist'. But I don't want to put words in his mouth.

Then he would have said 'racists feel the same way.'

I don't know; apparently there is a rumour going around that I am fucking subtle and nuanced and shit. I swear to Christ if I find the cunt who started that that I will fucking end them. Just so we're clear - I don't think Metaphor is racist. I'm sorry this is so confusing for some people. I'm certain everybody else got the point.

You will either explain what you meant or you won't. I'm not going to pretend I know what you meant and put words in your mouth.

 

[Metaphor]

Patooka themselves has made every indication that it is their intent that the reader figure it out, and a few readers have... Oh, while I was typing this up, Patooka said as much..

I'm not going to 'figure it out'. If Patooka wants to make a point he can make it clear.

 

[Metaphor]

Ah. There we go. Still not sufficient, and still not contextually important. Probably not even really actually necessary, but we may never know

Sex is the easy way around the horn.

There are lots of things sex is sufficient for.

For example, it is sufficient to know my sex to know what the correct pronouns to use for me are.

 

[Jarhyn]

Ah. There we go. Still not sufficient, and still not contextually important. Probably not even really actually necessary, but we may never know

Sex is the easy way around the horn.

There are lots of things sex is sufficient for.

For example, it is sufficient to know my sex to know what the correct pronouns to use for me are.

No, you claim it is, yet it is not. It is sufficient to know "your sex" and "that you are cis". If I did not know both of those things, I would not know what pronouns to use for you.

You are just very loudly "cis", and loudly (and wrongly) proclaim that nothing other than "cis" exists.

 

[Metaphor]

No, you claim it is, yet it is not. It is sufficient to know "your sex" and "that you are cis". If I did not know both of those things, I would not know what pronouns to use for you.

You are just very loudly "cis", and loudly (and wrongly) proclaim that nothing other than "cis" exists.

What is "cis", and when did I say I was "cis"?

 

[Jarhyn]

No, you claim it is, yet it is not. It is sufficient to know "your sex" and "that you are cis". If I did not know both of those things, I would not know what pronouns to use for you.

You are just very loudly "cis", and loudly (and wrongly) proclaim that nothing other than "cis" exists.

What is "cis", and when did I say I was "cis"?

Says the person who gets testy when I put "male" in quotes.

I put male in quotes so as to use your definition without accepting it. This question is merely obtuse. You claim that there are people born "male" and "female" and that "it matters" and that "all men are male" and "all women are female".

Cis is someone who either believes that all "men are male" that all women are "female", or who believes they are a man who is "male" else believes they are woman who is "female".

You have made clear you are of the form "believes all men are male and believes all women are female", so not just cis but religiously so.

 

[Metaphor]

You have made clear you are of the form "believes all men are male and believes all women are female", so not just cis but religiously so.

I see. It's true I believe all men are male and all women are female. I just didn't realise there was a special word for people who believe mundane truths.

 

[Jarhyn]

You have made clear you are of the form "believes all men are male and believes all women are female", so not just cis but religiously so.

I see. It's true I believe all men are male and all women are female. I just didn't realise there was a special word for people who believe mundane truths.

There is indeed a word specifically for people who "believe mundane truths". It's called "religion".

It just is a set property that ("the set of all people who believe 'all men are males'" AND "the set of all men") is entirely contained in "the set of all men who believe they are are 'male'" no matter how you define "men" and "male" or even "person".

 

[Metaphor]

There is indeed a word specifically for people who "believe mundane truths". It's called "religion".

Understanding the meaning of words is not religion. You don't even understand what a mundane truth is if you think believing them constitutes a religion.

 

[Jarhyn]

There is indeed a word specifically for people who "believe mundane truths". It's called "religion".

Understanding the meaning of words is not religion. You don't even understand what a mundane truth is if you think believing them constitutes a religion.

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

That's also pretty religious

 

[Metaphor]

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

That isn't what religion is.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

No. It's true by definition.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

"There are men who are not male" isn't heresy. It's just wrong.

 

[Jarhyn]

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

That isn't what religion is.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

No. It's true by definition.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

"There are men who are not male" isn't heresy. It's just wrong.

This may be the most epic self-own I have ever seen you make. I would say I need a new irony meter, but I'm pretty sure that pulse of irony fried every last one across the planet.

 

[Metaphor]

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

That isn't what religion is.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

No. It's true by definition.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

"There are men who are not male" isn't heresy. It's just wrong.

This may be the most epic self-own I have ever seen you make. I would say I need a new irony meter, but I'm pretty sure that pulse of irony fried every last one across the planet.

Sure luv.

 

[Jarhyn]

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

That isn't what religion is.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

No. It's true by definition.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

"There are men who are not male" isn't heresy. It's just wrong.

This may be the most epic self-own I have ever seen you make. I would say I need a new irony meter, but I'm pretty sure that pulse of irony fried every last one across the planet.

Sure luv.

Seriously, I saw it last night and after you walked back on the thing I pointed out I was like "maybe this time I don't say anything?"

And now it's too late to edit.

The core of religion is belief without doubt.

The only thing that I cannot and thus ought not doubt is that there is something here that doubts.

It was a "mundane truth" that the earth was at the center of our solar system, too.

 

[Metaphor]

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

That isn't what religion is.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

No. It's true by definition.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

"There are men who are not male" isn't heresy. It's just wrong.

This may be the most epic self-own I have ever seen you make. I would say I need a new irony meter, but I'm pretty sure that pulse of irony fried every last one across the planet.

Sure luv.

Seriously, I saw it last night and after you walked back on the thing I pointed out I was like "maybe this time I don't say anything?"

And now it's too late to edit.

The core of religion is belief without doubt.

Non. Religion beliefs are beliefs without evidence. Faith.

Believing definitionally true things is not religion. It is not religious to believe there are no four-sided triangles.

 

[Jarhyn]

No, "understanding the meaning of words" is it religion. No, religion is "believing truths to be so mundane as to be beyond question or nuance or investigation". It is belief in a sacred idea inviolate.

That isn't what religion is.

Like the belief that all "men must be 'male'".

It's pretty religious.

No. It's true by definition.

It's also a demand that "there are men who are not male" be considered a heresy.

"There are men who are not male" isn't heresy. It's just wrong.

This may be the most epic self-own I have ever seen you make. I would say I need a new irony meter, but I'm pretty sure that pulse of irony fried every last one across the planet.

Sure luv.

Seriously, I saw it last night and after you walked back on the thing I pointed out I was like "maybe this time I don't say anything?"

And now it's too late to edit.

The core of religion is belief without doubt.

Non. Religion beliefs are beliefs without evidence. Faith.

Believing definitionally true things is not religion. It is not religious to believe there are no four-sided triangles.

Defining things to be "true" and then using that kind of sophistry as the basis for action is exactly religion.

It is religion of the common form book: "book is true"; believer: "I believe it because it is true"; doubter: "why must it be?"; Beliver: "because this book is the of truth and says it is true!"

It's all remarkably circular. Just like the file I put such religious nonsense in.

 

[Toni]

But I would change (D) to say

So, you're not ACTUALLY gender critical, since you do not accept THE gender critical definition.
You just use the term for your own, nonconfrontational, agenda.

I'm not telling people to call me gender critical if they do not believe I am gender critical.

Why can't we just call you Metaphor?