Philosophy Now Forum

Man 'feels' that he is a woman, therefore 'he' is a woman.
Woman 'feels' that she is a man, therefore 'she' is a 'he'.
Woman 'feels' as if she is black, therefore she is black.
Woman wants to be Spanish, says she 'identifies' as Spanish, therefore she is Spanish.
Oh Hilaria, you couldn't have chosen a more appropriate name...

Gender envy, ethnic envy--sorted.

All that activity is caused by confusing words with truth.

This is cause to either laugh or throw up in the mask.

Unbelievable': House Democrat's opening prayer ends with 'amen and a-woman
https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/04/de ... nd-a-woman


That actually tops the obnoxiousness of Congressmen addressing women representatives as, "The gentlewoman from ___," which is done to be PC equitable with the word, "gentleman."

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 3:04 pm This is cause to either laugh or throw up in the mask.

Unbelievable': House Democrat's opening prayer ends with 'amen and a-woman
https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/04/de ... nd-a-woman


That actually tops the obnoxiousness of Congressmen addressing women representatives as, "The gentlewoman from ___," which is done to be PC equitable with the word, "gentleman."

What a pathetic fool. And he doesn't even say 'Amen', he says 'Aman'. Exactly what point is the idiot trying to make? The word 'Amen' has nothing to do with the word 'man', making his loony attempt to be 'inoffensive' even more offensive.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 6:33 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 3:04 pm This is cause to either laugh or throw up in the mask.

Unbelievable': House Democrat's opening prayer ends with 'amen and a-woman
https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/04/de ... nd-a-woman


That actually tops the obnoxiousness of Congressmen addressing women representatives as, "The gentlewoman from ___," which is done to be PC equitable with the word, "gentleman."

What a pathetic fool. And he doesn't even say 'Amen', he says 'Aman'. Exactly what point is the idiot trying to make? The word 'Amen' has nothing to do with the word 'man', making his loony attempt to be 'inoffensive' even more offensive.

there is a certain public that they perceive has lobbying power and influence, and they appease it with their butt kissing activities. they are very well aware of who they offend.

if they thought that those like minded to you, had such power and influence then they would be kissing the back side of those who think like you. simple, the system works, it depends on who is putting the time and effort in to have their interests represented.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:46 am Who do we think we are?

Hey that's a pretty good album by Deep Purple. Check it out!

Well, I guess there might be found some differences between categories of people who identifies themselves with anything else /or with they are/.
Let's say that there are those who 'feel' that they are like something; who 'see' that they are something; those who 'understand'...; those who 'acts'... and so on. Seems we can divide them into the number of such categories that equals to the number of relevant verbs. So, there are also those who just 'think' that they 'feel'; those who 'sympathy' that they 'see'; those who 'accept' that they 'understand',... etc. In other words there are those who just simulate or those who deliberately and balance-weight came to the decision.

I guess the number of those to whom we can be identified is depend on those popular characters and familiar to us personages /our colleagues, friends, etc/; and a number of the verbs /=the tools for 'connections'/ depends on an inner sum of abilities a person has, so in turn it may vary. Anyway, which one it'll be tomorrow - who knows? Maybe it depends on a type of rainy days or something else from the core inside. No matter who we are, as I see this, two problems stay for us: what should I do?, how /that/ new look is able to help me with the previous question?

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 3:04 pm This is cause to either laugh or throw up in the mask.

Unbelievable': House Democrat's opening prayer ends with 'amen and a-woman
https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/04/de ... nd-a-woman


That actually tops the obnoxiousness of Congressmen addressing women representatives as, "The gentlewoman from ___," which is done to be PC equitable with the word, "gentleman."

womandatory
womansion
womany
womanipulation
womaniac
womaneuver
womanifestation
womanticore
womanganese
Gerwomany

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:13 am All that activity is caused by confusing words with truth.

Your truth or my truth?

It's fucking incredible how philosophers of such self-purported wit, intelligence and intellect cannot adopt other people's vocabularies at the drop of a hat.

I think the bigger issue is why does anyone care (so that they'd have a problem with) however anyone wants to think of themselves or present themselves, etc. in these regards?

You want to be a woman, be a woman. You want to be a man, be a man. You want to be Asian, be Asian. You want to be a platypus, be a platypus. What difference does it make to me? (Well, aside from the fact that the more women the better in my opinion.)

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:22 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:13 am All that activity is caused by confusing words with truth.

Your truth or my truth?

It's fucking incredible how philosophers of such self-purported wit, intelligence and intellect cannot adopt other people's vocabularies at the drop of a hat.

If you equate truth to reality then there is only one reality, with many perspectives of that one reality.

It’s not a matter of blindness to another’s use of vocabulary.

It’s a matter of seeing that another’s use of vocabulary is inappropriate.

For instance, in philosophy and objective, rational discussion, vocabulary to express one's subjective personal opinion is mostly irrelevant ... but as in this instance, tolerated out of an innate sense of courtesy and respect, for the default condition is respect until idiocy beyond the shadow of a doubt demonstrates deserve'ed disrespect.

For instance, calling this bruiser a woman who should athletically compete against women is inappropriate to the purpose of women’s sports, which is for women to physically compete against women to determine a winner of that competition.

Calling that man a woman is also inappropriate for language clarity, for if you call a man a woman, then clarity has been muddied.

Hannah Mouncey to Play in Women’s League this Year (2018)
https://aussiegossip.com.au/news/hannah ... ague-year/

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:59 pm It’s a matter of seeing that another’s use of vocabulary is inappropriate.

Inappropriate in what context?

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:59 pm for the default condition is respect until idiocy beyond the shadow of a doubt demonstrates deserve'ed disrespect.

But it is well-understood that philosophy is a silly game, and as silly games go people play them.

But then there is the principle of charity, which (if adherently practiced to its absoluteness) does not permit to ever be such a moment "beyond a shadow of a doubt". That principle mandates you pursue an interpretation that never merits disrespect.

It's a game. If you are calling the opponent an "idiot" it's probably a good sign they are winning the game.

Don't hate the player - fix the game.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:59 pm For instance, calling this bruiser a woman who should athletically compete against women is inappropriate to the purpose of women’s sports, which is for women to physically compete against women to determine a winner of that competition.

Well you make an issue out of it, but do you remember when Caster Semenya had her genetic composition questioned?

After all - it's just sport, like philosophy is only a silly game. Who cares?

If you ask me, the entire notion of "fair competition" is an oxymoron.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:59 pm Calling that man a woman is also inappropriate for language clarity, for if you call a man a woman, then clarity has been been muddied.

And this is serious why?

For example, if some 6’3” aggressive transvestite gets his too-tight panties in a wad and jacks you up against a wall with a forearm to your throat for calling him a man or a bruiser, it would be entirely appropriate for one to see the bigger picture and attempt to avoid personal physical damage, and if calling him a beautiful woman would accomplish that, or complimenting his dress, shoes and nails would accomplish that, then such a view of reality would be appropriate … unless one has a more promising alternative.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:27 pm For example, if some 6’3” aggressive transvestite gets his too-tight panties in a wad and jacks you up against a wall with a forearm to your throat for calling him a man or a bruiser, it would be entirely appropriate for one to see the bigger picture and attempt to avoid personal physical damage, and if calling him a beautiful woman would accomplish that, or complimenting his dress, shoes and nails would accomplish that, then such a view of reality would be appropriate … unless one has a more promising alternative.

Grab her butt and tell her she's fuckable. See if that works out.

One man's promising alternative is another man's No Way Jose.