d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Lgbt Terrorist Attack Against Christian Children
Prev1232425262752Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 92,960
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Mar 28 2023 11:52am
Quote (Handcuffs @ Mar 28 2023 12:24pm)
I just find the semantic of needing a specific physical element to qualify as "violence" is odd, because it undermines what still remains hurtful, impactful, and abusive. It gives me very child-like "But I'm not touching you!" vibes.


for thousands of years violent meant physical, implicitly. and there were many other words to describe non-physical things that were still hurtful, impactful, and abusive.

there is physical, psychological, verbal, and sexual categories of abuse. there's even non-problematic violence like self defense or a linebacker tackling the running back.

the core of this is simple, people couldnt get others to respect non-physical abuse labels, so verbal abuse got lumped in for effect. there is zero other linguistic reason to expand the definition of violence, and it's clear as day this is an attempt at expansion.

make people respect the effect of bullying, or verbal abuse. dont just call it "violence" because respect for violence is baked in already, because that just results in people respective the word violence less.
Member
Posts: 4,156
Joined: Mar 20 2021
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Mar 28 2023 11:54am
i knew this kind of people are sick mind. another proof

This post was edited by Pisior on Mar 28 2023 11:54am
Member
Posts: 22,437
Joined: Mar 3 2007
Gold: 96.11
Mar 28 2023 11:55am
Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 28 2023 10:52am)
for thousands of years violent meant physical, implicitly. and there were many other words to describe non-physical things that were still hurtful, impactful, and abusive.

there is physical, psychological, verbal, and sexual categories of abuse. there's even non-problematic violence like self defense or a linebacker tackling the running back.

the core of this is simple, people couldnt get others to respect non-physical abuse labels, so verbal abuse got lumped in for effect. there is zero other linguistic reason to expand the definition of violence, and it's clear as day this is an attempt at expansion.

make people respect the effect of bullying, or verbal abuse. dont just call it "violence" because respect for violence is baked in already, because that just results in people respective the word violence less.


In so doing though, it lessens the severity with which marginalized groups are signaling.
Member
Posts: 4,621
Joined: Jan 30 2021
Gold: 751.50
Mar 28 2023 12:02pm
Member
Posts: 4,147
Joined: Jun 30 2022
Gold: 6.42
Warn: 10%
Mar 28 2023 12:04pm
Quote (Handcuffs @ Mar 28 2023 02:24pm)

I agree that "Drag is not an immutable characteristic". What I'm saying though is that many people who are supportive of this kind of legislation are likely to view being transgender as illegitimate, and then in-essence a transgender person merely existing would fall under this definition of "drag".


There are various states implementing different rules but I just read the one from Tennessee and it says

Quote
Adult cabaret performance" means a performance in a location other than an
adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers,
male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient
interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration;


I'm guessing the concern is that someone who is trans could be considered to be a male or female impersonator doing a performance by simply walking around in public?

I don't know enough about the legal system there to judge how likely that would be to happen and also be successfully prosecuted, I would assume it's unlikely but if not than I think it is a valid criticism.
Member
Posts: 34,186
Joined: May 25 2007
Gold: 21.00
Warn: 10%
Mar 28 2023 12:07pm
Quote (Handcuffs @ Mar 28 2023 10:24am)
I just find the semantic of needing a specific physical element to qualify as "violence" is odd, because it undermines what still remains hurtful, impactful, and abusive. It gives me very child-like "But I'm not touching you!" vibes.



How is destruction of property "violent"?



I agree that "Drag is not an immutable characteristic". What I'm saying though is that many people who are supportive of this kind of legislation are likely to view being transgender as illegitimate, and then in-essence a transgender person merely existing would fall under this definition of "drag".


Sticks & stones you idiot.
Member
Posts: 22,437
Joined: Mar 3 2007
Gold: 96.11
Mar 28 2023 12:10pm
Quote (DizzyBusiness @ Mar 28 2023 11:04am)
There are various states implementing different rules but I just read the one from Tennessee and it says

I'm guessing the concern is that someone who is trans could be considered to be a male or female impersonator doing a performance by simply walking around in public?

I don't know enough about the legal system there to judge how likely that would be to happen and also be successfully prosecuted, I would assume it's unlikely but if not than I think it is a valid criticism.


It is the concern from within the community that because they [anti-LGBTQ+ people] would be unable to say outright (in a legal sense) that "Transgender people should not be allowed around children", they instead form it as though it only applies to "drag". The issue, outside of the initial debate about whether drag can ever be suitable for children, is that depending on how one views being transgender, an argument can be made a transgender person is "in drag" and subsequently is unsuitable for being around children.

This post was edited by Handcuffs on Mar 28 2023 12:11pm
Member
Posts: 2,938
Joined: Dec 26 2021
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 10%
Mar 28 2023 12:10pm
Not only does the woke American't sickos manipulate and destroy kids by telling them LGBTQ+ lies they also get them killed :'(

This post was edited by meWW on Mar 28 2023 12:10pm
Member
Posts: 22,437
Joined: Mar 3 2007
Gold: 96.11
Mar 28 2023 12:10pm
Quote (El1te @ Mar 28 2023 11:07am)
Sticks & stones you idiot.


I think words can be quite damaging within a social species.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Mar 28 2023 12:13pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 28 2023 12:52pm)


the core of this is simple, people couldnt get others to respect non-physical abuse labels, so verbal abuse got lumped in for effect. there is zero other linguistic reason to expand the definition of violence, and it's clear as day this is an attempt at expansion.


I disagree. I think we came to respect non physical abuses as more serious than we had previously and adjusted the language to show that
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1232425262752Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll