Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Transgender rightsFollow

#452 Mar 20 2013 at 5:06 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel wrote:
I'm sorry, i will spell this out for you: No, i don't actually agree with gbaji's main point. I do agree with him that should is not the correct word, but not for the same reason he does.

By the way, i said gender, not ***. I understand if you don't really know what that means. Most people don't, it seems.


Let me clarify the obvious to you. I'm full aware of the two stances, hence the preface of my post. However, your last statement insinuated that the proper grammatical usage would favor your point. Ironically, that usage would benefit Gbaji's point more than your point, hence the reason why he mentioned it in the first place.

By the way, I know the difference between gender/***, as I know how to use a dictionary. 'Tis you that believes *** laws should be affected by one's gender choice.

Edited, Mar 21st 2013 1:11am by Almalieque
#453 Mar 20 2013 at 5:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
I'm sorry, i will spell this out for you: No, i don't actually agree with gbaji's main point. I do agree with him that should is not the correct word, but not for the same reason he does.

By the way, i said gender, not ***. I understand if you don't really know what that means. Most people don't, it seems.


Let me clarify the obvious to you. I'm full aware of the two stances, hence the preface of my post. However, your last statement insinuated that the proper grammatical usage would favor your point. Ironically, that usage would benefit Gbaji's point more than your point, hence the reason why he mentioned it in the first place.

By the way, I know the difference between gender/***, as I know how to use a dictionary. 'Tis you that believes *** laws should be affected by one's gender choice.


CRIPPLE FIGHT!
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#454 Mar 20 2013 at 6:13 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I'm sorry, i will spell this out for you: No, i don't actually agree with gbaji's main point. I do agree with him that should is not the correct word, but not for the same reason he does.

By the way, i said gender, not ***. I understand if you don't really know what that means. Most people don't, it seems.


Let me clarify the obvious to you. I'm full aware of the two stances, hence the preface of my post. However, your last statement insinuated that the proper grammatical usage would favor your point. Ironically, that usage would benefit Gbaji's point more than your point, hence the reason why he mentioned it in the first place.

By the way, I know the difference between gender/***, as I know how to use a dictionary. 'Tis you that believes *** laws should be affected by one's gender choice.


CRIPPLE FIGHT!


Who exactly are you fighting? I don't take too kindly to false advertisement.
#455 Mar 20 2013 at 6:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Quote:
By the way, I know the difference between gender/***, as I know how to use a dictionary.
Lol, a dictionary isn't going to properly explain such a complex thing. That's not even what a dictionary is for.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 8:20pm by Rachel9
____________________________
#456 Mar 20 2013 at 6:34 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
CRIPPLE FIGHT!
Can't we get an actual cripple fight instead? I bet that's more entertaining.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#457 Mar 20 2013 at 6:34 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
By the way, I know the difference between gender/***, as I know how to use a dictionary.
Lol, a dictionary isn't going to properly explain such a complex thing. That's not even what a dictionary is for.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 8:20pm by Rachel9


Dictionaries aren't for explanations, but for definitions. Your "complex" explanation contains words that are properly defined in dictionaries. Those definitions cannot change just because you choose to bolster your point. Further proof of your nescience.
#458 Mar 20 2013 at 6:35 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Quote:
Your "complex" explanation contains words that are properly defined in dictionaries.
What?
____________________________
#459 Mar 20 2013 at 6:37 PM Rating: Good
******
49,733 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
]Can't we get an actual cripple fight instead?
Remember that scene in the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie, where Elizabeth is eating and Barbossa is talking, and suddenly she freaks out and tries to escape? Right about where he says "You best start believing in ghost stories Miss Turner. You're in one. " Yeah, kind of like that.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#460 Mar 20 2013 at 6:43 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
Your "complex" explanation contains words that are properly defined in dictionaries.
What?


...Smiley: rolleyes Dios Mio...


Your explanation of your point contains words, does it not? Those words have definitions. Those definitions are defined in dictionaries. Your explanation can only be valid if those words are used as defined in the dictionary.
#461 Mar 20 2013 at 6:46 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
]Can't we get an actual cripple fight instead?
Remember that scene in the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie, where Elizabeth is eating and Barbossa is talking, and suddenly she freaks out and tries to escape? Right about where he says "You best start believing in ghost stories Miss Turner. You're in one. " Yeah, kind of like that.
Sure seems like a **** of a lot more fun than what we've got going on here.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#462 Mar 20 2013 at 7:03 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
Your "complex" explanation contains words that are properly defined in dictionaries.
What?


...Smiley: rolleyes Dios Mio...


Your explanation of your point contains words, does it not? Those words have definitions. Those definitions are defined in dictionaries. Your explanation can only be valid if those words are used as defined in the dictionary.
Sure, but there's more to a word/concept than the definition a dictionary gives it.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 9:04pm by Rachel9
____________________________
#463 Mar 20 2013 at 7:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Sure, but there's more to a word/concept than the definition a dictionary gives it.

Kitten: people understand. Let it go. Really.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#464 Mar 20 2013 at 7:41 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
Your "complex" explanation contains words that are properly defined in dictionaries.
What?


...Smiley: rolleyes Dios Mio...


Your explanation of your point contains words, does it not? Those words have definitions. Those definitions are defined in dictionaries. Your explanation can only be valid if those words are used as defined in the dictionary.
Sure, but there's more to a word/concept than the definition a dictionary gives it.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 9:04pm by Rachel9


Are you implying that we are able to capriciously alter any definition with validation, even if it's contrary to the dictionary?

Edited, Mar 21st 2013 4:24am by Almalieque
#465 Mar 20 2013 at 7:46 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
Rachel, if you value your sanity, let it go. Don't follow him into that dark, scary, empty mind of his.
#466 Mar 20 2013 at 8:12 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Listen to Belkira. Avoid intelligence at all cost. Don't clog your current thinking with proper usage of words. Just think what people will think of you... using words correctly and all. What next? Proper grammar?
#467 Mar 20 2013 at 8:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#468 Mar 20 2013 at 8:31 PM Rating: Decent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
My use of the phrase "should be" was in the context of what their outward body should reflect to mirror the way they feel. It was an appropriate usage of the phrase, I apologize if the context wasn't conveyed correctly. I was trying to phrase the question in a way that would keep moron over there from trying to delve into definitions. (Which didn't matter anyway, since he refuses to answer a simple @#%^ing question.) Instead, I have this moron dissecting it.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 9:37pm by Belkira
#469 Mar 20 2013 at 9:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
After reading this, I'm not sure who I hate more: Alma or Rachel.
Why choose?

Good point.
#470 Mar 20 2013 at 9:38 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Are you implying that we are able to capriciously alter any definition with validation, even if it's contrary to the dictionary?
No, i'm explicitly stating that a dictionary only gives a brief overview of the meaning of a word. It does not, should not, and never will perfectly explain everything about a word, such as minor differences between similar words, why one seemingly identical word is used instead of another in some situations, but not others, etc. A dictionary is meant to allow people who do not understand a word to more or less understand it. If you read a dictionary entry, and think there's nothing more to the word, then you're missing the entire point.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 11:43pm by Rachel9
____________________________
#471 Mar 20 2013 at 10:05 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,297 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you implying that we are able to capriciously alter any definition with validation, even if it's contrary to the dictionary?
No, i'm explicitly stating that a dictionary only gives a brief overview of the meaning of a word. It does not, should not, and never will perfectly explain everything about a word, such as minor differences between similar words, why one seemingly identical word is used instead of another in some situations, but not others, etc. A dictionary is meant to allow people who do not understand a word to more or less understand it. If you read a dictionary entry, and think there's nothing more to the word, then you're missing the entire point.
The OED begs to differ.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
Last week, I saw a guy with an eyepatch and a gold monocle and pointed him out to Flea as one of the most awesome things I've seen, ever. If I had an eyepatch and a gold monocle, I'd always dress up as Mr. Peanut but with a hook hand and a parrot.
#472 Mar 20 2013 at 10:33 PM Rating: Decent
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
For instance, different intellectual professions like medicine, philosophy and others have technical languages and words that have very specific meanings that are different to how they are used in common vernacular. For instance, when a civilian uses the word shock*, they usually use it in a different way to the very precise and wide-ranging physilogical way that medical staff mean when they use the term shock. Shock to a doctor means that the person is no longer digesting food very well, that their blood has withdrawn to their internal organs away from their limbs and brain, that the patient is in a critical condition. Similar with panic** Panic to a medical professional means that the patient is in a state when they are convinced that their body is dying, and that death is imminent. Any lesser mental state to a mental professional is called anxiety. So if you've just witnessed a horrific car smash that your spouse and children are in, and you think that they have probably just died in front of you? The emotional state you're in right then? It's called anxiety by the medical profession.

* "I was shocked by Obama's new bill" "I got a shock when I saw him recently" "I got a shock from touching the door handle."
** "I panicked when I saw my electricity bill" "When I realised I was lost in the woods, I panicked".
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#473 Mar 21 2013 at 5:53 AM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you implying that we are able to capriciously alter any definition with validation, even if it's contrary to the dictionary?
No, i'm explicitly stating that a dictionary only gives a brief overview of the meaning of a word. It does not, should not, and never will perfectly explain everything about a word, such as minor differences between similar words, why one seemingly identical word is used instead of another in some situations, but not others, etc. A dictionary is meant to allow people who do not understand a word to more or less understand it. If you read a dictionary entry, and think there's nothing more to the word, then you're missing the entire point.

Edited, Mar 20th 2013 11:43pm by Rachel9


That is utterly false. I'm not sure where you received that nonsense, but the point of a dictionary is to set the standard of the meaning of a word. Else, you are capable of making false definitions. How is one to validate a meaning if you can't use the dictionary as a constant?

What if the definition that you're giving isn't in the dictionary? Does it make it true? Who validates that?

Aripyanfar wrote:
For instance, different intellectual professions like medicine, philosophy and others have technical languages and words that have very specific meanings that are different to how they are used in common vernacular. For instance, when a civilian uses the word shock*, they usually use it in a different way to the very precise and wide-ranging physilogical way that medical staff mean when they use the term shock. Shock to a doctor means that the person is no longer digesting food very well, that their blood has withdrawn to their internal organs away from their limbs and brain, that the patient is in a critical condition. Similar with panic** Panic to a medical professional means that the patient is in a state when they are convinced that their body is dying, and that death is imminent. Any lesser mental state to a mental professional is called anxiety. So if you've just witnessed a horrific car smash that your spouse and children are in, and you think that they have probably just died in front of you? The emotional state you're in right then? It's called anxiety by the medical profession.

* "I was shocked by Obama's new bill" "I got a shock when I saw him recently" "I got a shock from touching the door handle."
** "I panicked when I saw my electricity bill" "When I realised I was lost in the woods, I panicked".


All jargon is defined in specific dictionaries. All of your medical terms may not appear in your common dictionary, but are defined else where. Regardless of how the words are used, the words have specific meanings. As stated before, in casual talk, slightly misusing a word isn't a problem; however, you cannot make arguments based on false definitions.
#474 Mar 21 2013 at 6:05 AM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
Language both evolves, and is context specific. For example, a metaphysician using the word "whole" is most likely using it to mean "the entire universe". Often they will help you out by capitalizing Whole so you know we are talking about the universe. But not just the entire material universe. Whole refers to EVERYTHING. Which basically means God-including-the-physical-universe. In light of this, you might consider the etymology of the word "holy". It seems to have lost a w and an e.

If we are talking about a serious contextual problem, theory, solution, etc, often in an academic or professional setting, it's time to make language work for the situation, if the requisite language is not already in place. In the West, gender fluidity was a taboo issue. It's no longer taboo, and thanks to Endocrine Disrupters, it's a growing phenomenon. Definitely time to talk conceptually in a good-faith way, instead of pretending that language defines reality, and not the other way around.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#475 Mar 21 2013 at 6:08 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#476 Mar 21 2013 at 6:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
At the risk of beating this into the ground. Given that the use of the word gender here assumes we're talking about "gender vs ***", then gender always refers to what someone believes/feels they are. Not what they "should be".

Please forever stop "explaining" things to me. There has never, once, been an instance where I was confused about the substance of what you were trying to communicate. I mean you're possibly the worst communicator in the world, so there IS that, but obviously you trying to "clarify" something inevitably just makes it worse.

I get it. I understand your idiotic point that there's no authority derived from the brain's insistence that one is a gender that doesn't match one's *** organ. The distinction is UTTERLY meaningless. There's no functional difference in the terminology. None. If someone is the female gender then they should have been born with a ******. Rhetoric doesn't drive understanding. Denying the word "should" in no way reduces the importance or provenance of "brain gender" over *** organ gender. At all. So stop. What you seem to think is a clever tactic of having someone admit that the word "should" doesn't apply to we can get to "nothing says the *** organs are wrong, bleah bleah" is a game most of us were bored with as children. It's transparent and foolish.

Have I cleared it up for you now?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 88 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (88)