Trolls, keyboard warriors... ignore, block or digilantism?

[Libsam]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

At this point in time I'm pretty convinced you don't even know what you're talking about with this "postmodernism science" and that you were fed that line by one of the "great thinkers" that likes to throw out red meat terms to make them feel intellectually superior.

If you feel my questions are of a "gotcha" nature, perhaps you're not as firm in your beliefs as you'd like us to think.

Google postmodern science for yourself.

 

[adrina]

Google postmodern science for yourself.

Googling it only reaffirms my original contention that you are throwing out terms fed to you by people with an agenda.

 

[Libsam]

@hsnh

I recall you talking about Foucalt and Derrida, and other people in that realm of thought. I wasn't really paying attention because I didn't realize I was interested.

 

[GeorgeWalker]

Blah blah blah... again can't refute what the man says, so must attack the man.

More and different words don't change the act or the meaning.

"Do you understand what this means?"

 

[Disgustipated]

The trolls, keyboard warriors, etc. are to be expected. It's the real assholes you have to watch for - the ones who pretend to be something they're not, garner your trust, and then use it against you. Those are the real cretins of this place and the ones destroying it.

Maybe one day the good people on the Lit - those who possess damaging personal info on said troll(s), will strike back and expose them and their dirty little secrets.

 

[Libsam]

Googling it only reaffirms my original contention that you are throwing out terms fed to you by people with an agenda.

I became aware of the term from Bret Weinstein. The professor central to the Evergreen stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq4Y87idawk

Watch from 43:30 to 44:30

 

[TalkRadio]

The trolls, keyboard warriors, etc. are to be expected. It's the real assholes you have to watch for - the ones who pretend to be something they're not, garner your trust, and then use it against you. Those are the real cretins of this place and the ones destroying it.

Maybe one day the good people on the Lit - those who possess damaging personal info on said troll(s), will strike back and expose them and their dirty little secrets.

Filed away for future reference.

 

[adrina]

I became aware of the term from Bret Weinstein. The professor central to the Evergreen stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq4Y87idawk

Watch from 43:30 to 44:30

Somewhere between the abject fear of looking at anything in a different manner and identifying the extreme as mainstream... yeah... good luck with that.

I don't think hard science has anything to worry about from a fringe group deciding to play with terminology. Who knows, they might just see something differently and expand our knowledge base. Frankly they aren't as bad as the people that want to teach creationism as science. And there's nothing to be added to our knowledge base from that.

 

[Hashtag47]

Nobody likes me and I can't connect with anybody here, yet I still come back. That's how lonely and pathetic I am

Shut up, bert.

 

[Disgustipated]

Filed away for future reference.

How many pics of ours have you right-clicked, Kenneth? Follow-up question: Which of us do you jerk-it to more?

 

[Libsam]

Somewhere between the abject fear of looking at anything in a different manner and identifying the extreme as mainstream... yeah... good luck with that.

I don't think hard science has anything to worry about from a fringe group deciding to play with terminology. Who knows, they might just see something differently and expand our knowledge base. Frankly they aren't as bad as the people that want to teach creationism as science. And there's nothing to be added to our knowledge base from that.

Biology is a science, right?
Have you seen Bill Nye's show?

Should biology not worry about Gender Identity?

 

[Queersetti]

Somewhere between the abject fear of looking at anything in a different manner and identifying the extreme as mainstream... yeah... good luck with that.

I don't think hard science has anything to worry about from a fringe group deciding to play with terminology. Who knows, they might just see something differently and expand our knowledge base. Frankly they aren't as bad as the people that want to teach creationism as science. And there's nothing to be added to our knowledge base from that.

You realize, don't you, that you are basically trying to explain to a dog why it shouldn't piss on a tree, right?

 

[adrina]

You realize, don't you, that you are basically trying to explain to a dog why it shouldn't piss on a tree, right?

Don't dash my hopes Q.

 

[adrina]

Biology is a science, right?
Have you seen Bill Nye's show?

Should biology not worry about Gender Identity?

Biology shouldn't "worry" about gender identity. Gender identity can be included for study under the tent of biology. However straight people shouldn't worry about people studying gender identity nor find it a threat to straighthood (is that a word - whatever).

 

[Disgustipated]

I have compromising pics of Q and Busybody.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Queersetti]

I have compromising pics of Q and Busybody.

His body, not really that busy.

 

[adrina]

Is this not part of the same problem? Does this not make good people the bad people?

And on the flip side... "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[adrina]

I do not think that doing the same thing is required. I think enforcing rules in place might be a start, and supporting people who are victims of crimes like aphro suffered would be far from nothing.

What rules could have protected her? I'm not being mean or sharp, but from my understanding there are no rules that are in place to be applied to protect her or support her. And do we know it was someone from Lit?

 

[Freudian_Slit]

Not being familiar with the term postmodern science, I did a preliminary search, and without digging too deeply the only source I found was on the site Conservapedia. Needless to say, this isn't a site with academic rigor. There are bits and pieces of recognizable information on the page, but the context is very wonky.

There is an issue in theoretical physics about the necessity of, call it empirical validation, arising from the fact that the frontiers of theory stretch beyond the current limits of experiments. But this is by no means a non controversial issue. The notion that empirical validation ought to be weakened to reflect the current state of physics is experiencing great pushback. (And justifiably so, IMO.)

 

[Libsam]

Biology shouldn't "worry" about gender identity. Gender identity can be included for study under the tent of biology.

"worry" was the word you used.
Can you explain to me why Gender Identity should be taught "under the tent" of a hard science?

However straight people shouldn't worry about people studying gender identity nor find it a threat to straighthood (is that a word - whatever).

This is a derisive statement. An example of Postmodern Debate.

 

[Disgustipated]

Is this not part of the same problem? Does this not make good people the bad people?

I suppose it is -but- I also said "the good" people implying that "they" won't do it. I think that sort of blackmail is on par with cheaters and alts gathering info under one name and using against those who trusted them as a weapon.December, anyone?

You've met a lot of Litsters and I'm sure you could spew some truths about those you have met wouldn't want you to reveal - amirite? And vice-versa?

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[adrina]

"worry" was the word you used.
Can you explain to me why Gender Identity should be taught "under the tent" of a hard science?


This is a derisive statement. An example of Postmodern Debate.

Yes I did use that word. I see where you got it from.

Why shouldn't aspects of gender identity be studied in biology or hard science? Are you denying there is or may be a physical component possibly at play? Whether hormonal or in the brain. Your automatic rejection is what led to my statement about it being a threat to straightness. Why preclude the possibility of something without even giving it the opportunity to be studied? What do you gain from that? Why do you have a problem with that?

The reality is that gender identity could be studied under several categories. That you don't understand this isn't really logical.

(And you're still demonstrating that you really don't have a grasp of the term but instead bandy it about as if it is supposed to mean something.)