WOKE and proud of it....

[henry quirk]

You've missed the point...again.

Ah, well...

[accelafine]

Men and women aren't just physically different. They are psychologically different, and it seems that sometimes people are born with a mismatch between the two. I can't imagine how awful it must be to have the physical form of one sex and the internal feelings of the other.

Oh, and what would the 'internal feelings' of a woman be (presumably as opposed to external feelings)? Pray tell. What are the 'internal feelings' that Jenner has that make him 'psychologically a woman'? Jenner can dress as he likes, offensive as it is, but he's always going to look like a man because that's what he is, in every cell of his body.

You are way out of your depth 'harbal'. 'Psychologically a woman'. What a load of bollocks.

[Alexiev]

.......

I'm typing on my phone from the Sierras, and leaving for a 5 day backpack in a couple of days. This will limit my response.

However, mistrust of the MSM suggests an ideological bias. Aren't Murdock and Fox News "mainstream"? Are even credentialed internet sources more reliable than the New York Times, which is at least popular enough to be vetted and criticized?

Mistrust of the MSM is like mistrust of mainstream science which, after all, is replete with political motives. We can probably find credentialed flat earthers on the Internet, too

The idea that I am some sort of Progressive is also incorrect. Only when viewed through a far tight lens can this be seen as true. I'll grant that I despise Trump, who is a danger to democracy, a wanna-be autocrat, and a jerk. I hated him when he was a reality TV star, too.

I also see property rights as legal (fiat) rights, which disturbs some modern conservatives. It is hardly a radical position, though.

Biden should, of course, step down as the Democrat nominee. But contrary to Trump's claims, he has been a good president. The economy is strong; we have abandonned Afghanistan to its fate (for all his isolationist beliefs, Trump never did that), and complaints about overly woke policies are overblown, even when they are valid. Any decent candidate would trounce Trump. Hillary Clinton and Biden were lousy candidates, and Biden still won, despite Trump's attempts to claim otherwise. Unfortunately, Biden is a worse candidate now than 4 years ago,. (By candidate, I mean able to get out the votes, not able to run the nation.)

[Alexis Jacobi]

....

Thanks for your response. I understand being limited with a hand-held telephone. I am in that position often when I am multi-day biking. But I generally always have a connection. I assume you will not. Enjoy yourself.

I will use your post to respond in general ways to some of what you assert. It is all part of the larger conversation.

One thing I notice is how the *narratives* have shifted. I want to note this and submit this Gil Scott Heron tune which I admire a great deal.

Isn't it interesting, and a bit weird, that the Right in some ways is taking an anti-war posture while the Left takes up a defense of these adventures?

[phyllo]

Isn't it interesting, and a bit weird, that the Right in some ways is taking an anti-war posture while the Left takes up a defense of these adventures?

Which war?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Isn't it interesting, and a bit weird, that the Right in some ways is taking an anti-war posture while the Left takes up a defense of these adventures?

Which war?

Recently, some on the Right-Conservative spectrum seem to be taking an anti-war position at least in respect to Ukraine/Russia. I see it in many of the videos I watch (where I try to keep informed about *popular opinion*). Take as one example Tucker Carlson.

What I think you are saying is that as it pertains to numerous of the recent wars in the Middle East that our Right-tending jingoists were largely in favor of wars. And I agree. But it is the so-called Neocon position that is, I think, being challenged by *nationalists*.

Populist movements have never been in favor of war simply because it is people from their class that must fight them.

There is more to be said about that class and the soldiers who have been through wars and have become politicized against *our institutions* (and that notorious 'complex' that seems to seek wars out).

It is as Gil Scott Heron says: the military and the monetary collude in true perversity. That is a very popular opinion.

Here is another tune by John Trudell with a very interesting take on 'rich man's warring'.

[phyllo]

Well, if you look at the current wars, Ukraine and Gaza, they are against war in Ukraine and for war in Gaza.

Or in other words, against Ukraine defending itself from an attack and for Israel continuing an attack on Gaza.

Seems fairly consistent ... they are on the side of the aggressive 800-pound gorilla.

[Harbal]

Men and women aren't just physically different. They are psychologically different, and it seems that sometimes people are born with a mismatch between the two. I can't imagine how awful it must be to have the physical form of one sex and the internal feelings of the other.

Oh, and what would the 'internal feelings' of a woman be (presumably as opposed to external feelings)? Pray tell. What are the 'internal feelings' that Jenner has that make him 'psychologically a woman'? Jenner can dress as he likes, offensive as it is, but he's always going to look like a man because that's what he is, in every cell of his body.

You are way out of your depth 'harbal'. 'Psychologically a woman'. What a load of bollocks.

There are none physical differences between men and women. They typically have different interests, and emotional responses. For example; I can't imagine many men behaving the way you do.

[accelafine]

Men and women aren't just physically different. They are psychologically different, and it seems that sometimes people are born with a mismatch between the two. I can't imagine how awful it must be to have the physical form of one sex and the internal feelings of the other.

Oh, and what would the 'internal feelings' of a woman be (presumably as opposed to external feelings)? Pray tell. What are the 'internal feelings' that Jenner has that make him 'psychologically a woman'? Jenner can dress as he likes, offensive as it is, but he's always going to look like a man because that's what he is, in every cell of his body.

You are way out of your depth 'harbal'. 'Psychologically a woman'. What a load of bollocks.

There are none physical differences between men and women. They typically have different interests, and emotional responses. For example; I can't imagine many men behaving the way you do.

That doesn't make any sense. Have you taken to the bottle, harbal?

[Harbal]

Oh, and what would the 'internal feelings' of a woman be (presumably as opposed to external feelings)? Pray tell. What are the 'internal feelings' that Jenner has that make him 'psychologically a woman'? Jenner can dress as he likes, offensive as it is, but he's always going to look like a man because that's what he is, in every cell of his body.

You are way out of your depth 'harbal'. 'Psychologically a woman'. What a load of bollocks.

There are none physical differences between men and women. They typically have different interests, and emotional responses. For example; I can't imagine many men behaving the way you do.

That doesn't make any sense.

I know. I'm making an effort to fit in.

Have you taken to the bottle, harbal?

Are you referring to a specific bottle?

[accelafine]

Still not funny any more. That's sad

[Harbal]

Still not funny any more. That's sad

I'm surprised that anyone with as much anger as you has any emotional space left for feeling sad.

[accelafine]

Still not funny any more. That's sad

I'm surprised that anyone with as much anger as you has any emotional space left for feeling sad.

Now that's funny

Don't be sad. I'm sure your amiable little buddy will be back in no time with a new name--probably something like rhubarb crumble, or lemon meringue pie

[Immanuel Can]

Nobody has to agree with anybody's moral view.

Actually, they do...if that view is to allow us to form a society, a justice system, a system of distribution, a set of human rights....

If that's a problem, then you also have a problem.

No, actually: as an objectivist, I have no such problem. As a Subjectivist, it's entirely yours.

But the issue involves much more than biological sex...

What "issue"? What one is, sexually, is entirely determined by biology. Your own physiology will tell you that much.

Men and women aren't just physically different. They are psychologically different,

Right. So that's pretty much the whole ball game. What's left?

...and it seems that sometimes people are born with a mismatch between the two.

What is your evidence for that belief, that "seeming"? How do you know that what a 13 year old boy imagines a "girl" is, is what a girl is? Or how do you conclude that what a 13 year old girl thinks a "boy" is, is a boy?

I can't imagine how awful it must be to have the physical form of one sex and the internal feelings of the other.

It would be bewildering. You would be imagining yourself to be something you've never been, don't understand, and couldn't possibly understand. For what experience has a 13 year old boy with being a girl, or a 13 year old girl with what it means to be a boy? They must be utterly perplexed.

I've already said that biological males should not be allowed to compete in women's sport.

Why not? If sex is "constructed," then as soon as some man wants to "reconstruct" himself as a woman, what's your rationale for stopping him, if biology doesn't count?

I only have a rationale for stopping him on the basis that biology does count, so I can't answer your question.

If it's biology that makes him a male, then transing is simply impossible.

I don't know what you mean. He might be a genuine woman as far as he is concerned, but that's his perceived reality, not mine.

That's not how the Wokies see things. They think it's your moral duty to "affirm" his new sex.

Why should I be interested in how the "Wokies" see things?

I don't think you should.

And if you don't, you're "oppressing" and "deadnaming" him.

I would be oppressing him if I tried to prevent him from living the life he wants to live within the limits of social practicality.

Where is it objectively written, "People have a right to live any way they want to?" Maybe you can quote that holy scripture to me.

Why can't we just try to accommodate him without giving into any unreasonable demands he might have?

The demand for a boy to be a girl is unreasonable. As you admit, it defies biology and psychology, and has no relation to reality we can detect.

[Immanuel Can]

He can stop lots of wars as president. For example, by not supporting the NATO allies when they are attacked - forcing them to surrender.

Do you think that's actually what he'd do? What are you basing that on?

Trump is an isolationist and he is buddy-buddy with Putin and other tyrants.

Ah, the Russia-Collusion Hoax. You're still a victim of that, are you?

Au contraire, he created the famed Abraham Accords, which came close to providing the first basis of peace in living memory. Did you not know that?

The Abraham Accords didn't do anything for Palestinians.

Palestinians have done nothing for Palestinians. Hamas has done worse than nothing for the Palestinians. At least Israel gave them their own sovereign territory -- as bad as that idea proved to be. As What it did a lot of good for is potential peace in the Middle East...Syria, Jordan, UAE, Bahrain, Israel...

Did you not know that "Christ" is literally the Greek translation of "Messiah"? Both simply mean "Anointed One." So yeah, he did; for he spoke in Aramaic, and it was recorded in Greek. So the exact word Christ used would have been "Messiah."

Jesus never used the words "messiah" or "christ". Check your bible.

I did. I gave you the references. You ignored them.