d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Use My Timetravelling Pronouns, Bigot
Prev18910111217Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 24,802
Joined: Mar 7 2010
Gold: 22,202.22
Oct 29 2019 02:29pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Oct 29 2019 03:23pm)
I've seen plenty of people who I didn't know if they were a male or female

They were also ugly as fuuuck


exceptions do not disprove the rule.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Oct 29 2019 02:43pm
Quote (ReturnFormer @ Oct 29 2019 03:29pm)
exceptions do not disprove the rule.


Depends in what sense you are using "disprove". It definitely disproves the rule as absolute. At minimum it demonstrates that the rule has exceptions.
Member
Posts: 22,442
Joined: Mar 3 2007
Gold: 76.11
Oct 29 2019 02:50pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Oct 29 2019 12:23pm)
I've seen plenty of people who I didn't know if they were a male or female

They were also ugly as fuuuck


I have a name...
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Oct 29 2019 02:53pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 29 2019 03:24pm)
you have an interesting relationship with time.....

english, and he/she by extension, are thousands of years older the Winnie the Pooh.

if we go back even further we see that almost 100% of art made by early civilizations had either exaggerated breasts or an exaggerated penis. so even before English our ancestors used a strict sexual binary, even their gods had sex.

in the case of Winnie, his penis isn't missing, it's implied. that's what the author calling him "he" meant.

around the time that "he" and "she" were created women and men were not similar in appearance. women wore loose shifts or dresses, men wore pants and tunics. you didn't need to see their junk to know what sex they were, that's basically the entire story of Mulan. everyone assumed that she was male because she dressed like it.

i can see how you'd be confused with thinking the pronoun was based on characteristics, rather than genitalia, if you're ignorant of the facts. in reality those characteristics were exclusive to those sexes, in the year 1,000 no men wore dresses (as a general rule).

it really is this simple, stick with me now, "he" historically has meant person with penis that shoots the sperm in the "she", which means person with vagina that can turn said sperm into a baby then feed it milk from "her" breasts. the terms were created directly to differentiate between the sexes, they were not created to refer to "person who wears dress". that's a correlation error in thinking it was causation.

edit: and this part is just silly:

the pronoun was created for the opposite reason, so you didnt have to see their genitalia to find out if you could mate with them.

i know you liberals like to hack up language but i didnt think history was on the docket this badly..... take an anthro class? lol


I'm talking about how people assess which pronoun to use in a given situation, not some reading of pronoun assignments as absolute truths of biology. We could just as easily make a third set of pronouns for people with androgynous characteristics and call them Hijras and it would be just as biologically true as the binary description.

Which pronoun you use has never been dependent on what genitals the other person has. It has, however, been based on secondary characteristics that are typical of one sex or the other, and on tertiary characteristics that are adopted depending on societal norms. I.E. primary = genitals, secondary = hip to waist ratio, tertiary = clothing choice, preferred pronoun, etc.

The only way you can reasonably say that the penis is implied is to create some ridiculous headcanon that Winnie the Pooh has a retractable penis that never shows up, or that in the truest reading you should mentally insert a dangling dong into every image of Pooh. In truth we call Winnie the Pooh a boy because he has a deeper voice and refers to himself as such. Change his voice and slap a "her" label on the same design and you've suddenly created a character that is female without doing anything with genitals.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Oct 29 2019 02:55pm
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 286.00
Oct 29 2019 03:02pm
Is this the thread where people tell themselves they're not shitty for misgendering people?

Lol just accept you are all basic as fuck and get over it.

Someone at a party told me they don't agree with all this transgender stuff I said its OK because transgendered people don't agree with stupid redneck stuff most of the time either.

Transgender people know that bigots are never going to respect who they are. There's no need to keep going out your way to disrespect these people.

This post was edited by Skinned on Oct 29 2019 03:05pm
Member
Posts: 93,001
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Oct 29 2019 03:11pm
Quote (Skinned @ Oct 29 2019 04:02pm)
Is this the thread where people tell themselves they're not shitty for misgendering people?

Lol just accept you are all basic as fuck and get over it.

Someone at a party told me they don't agree with all this transgender stuff I said its OK because transgendered people don't agree with stupid redneck stuff most of the time either.

Transgender people know that bigots are never going to respect who they are. There's no need to keep going out your way to disrespect these people.


I have no issues changing with the times as long as we can all acknowledge we're changing. But it seems trans propaganda won't even let us do that. I guess now "he" never meant person with penis. And were still at war with east Asia and always have been...

Quote (Thor123422 @ Oct 29 2019 03:53pm)
I'm talking about how people assess which pronoun to use in a given situation, not some reading of pronoun assignments as absolute truths of biology. We could just as easily make a third set of pronouns for people with androgynous characteristics and call them Hijras and it would be just as biologically true as the binary description.

Which pronoun you use has never been dependent on what genitals the other person has. It has, however, been based on secondary characteristics that are typical of one sex or the other, and on tertiary characteristics that are adopted depending on societal norms. I.E. primary = genitals, secondary = hip to waist ratio, tertiary = clothing choice, preferred pronoun, etc.

The only way you can reasonably say that the penis is implied is to create some ridiculous headcanon that Winnie the Pooh has a retractable penis that never shows up, or that in the truest reading you should mentally insert a dangling dong into every image of Pooh. In truth we call Winnie the Pooh a boy because he has a deeper voice and refers to himself as such. Change his voice and slap a "her" label on the same design and you've suddenly created a character that is female without doing anything with genitals.


Pooh is a character written by someone who called him he.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Oct 29 2019 03:12pm
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 286.00
Oct 29 2019 03:14pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 29 2019 05:11pm)
I have no issues changing with the times as long as we can all acknowledge we're changing. But it seems trans propaganda won't even let us do that. I guess now "he" never meant person with penis. And were still at war with east Asia and always have been...



Pooh is a character written by someone who called him he.


Language changes. Faggot doesn't mean bundle of sticks anymore.

In the contacts of the original post of this thread we are talking about defending the right to be disrespectful to your coworkers on issues of identity.

Also the world comes before language. Humans as they are now existed then. It would be correct to say that some groups are so marginalized they don't have very many words describing them.

For example philosophy was the philosophy of European males until The Existentialists less than 100 years ago.

This post was edited by Skinned on Oct 29 2019 03:20pm
Member
Posts: 93,001
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Oct 29 2019 03:15pm
Quote (Skinned @ Oct 29 2019 04:14pm)
Language changes. Faggot doesn't mean bundle of sticks anymore.

In the contacts of the original post of this thread we are talking about defending the right to be disrespectful to your coworkers on issues of identity.


Language does change. He used to exclusively mean person with penis. It no longer does. No issues from me.
Member
Posts: 50,922
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,335.99
Oct 29 2019 03:22pm
Quote (Skinned @ Oct 29 2019 04:02pm)
Is this the thread where people tell themselves they're not shitty for misgendering people?

Lol just accept you are all basic as fuck and get over it.

Someone at a party told me they don't agree with all this transgender stuff I said its OK because transgendered people don't agree with stupid redneck stuff most of the time either.

Transgender people know that bigots are never going to respect who they are. There's no need to keep going out your way to disrespect these people.


hey that would be great, if people just agreed to disagree and lived with it.
Unfortunately, in this society you're free to disagree with stupid redneck stuff and nobody will give a shit, but if you don't affirm gender delusions you'll have an SJW hit squad busting down your front door in full tactical. And that's not even hyperbole for the UK
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 286.00
Oct 29 2019 03:24pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 29 2019 05:15pm)
Language does change. He used to exclusively mean person with penis. It no longer does. No issues from me.


It was always socially constructed and what it means to be a man varies across time and space.

You can't point to a gender like you can a tree. Ontologically speaking no comparison between discrete objects in the world made out of atoms and concepts not made out of atoms whose entirety is dictated by the shared collective meaning among large groups of people through mental action.

This post was edited by Skinned on Oct 29 2019 03:24pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev18910111217Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll