251–260 of 307 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is going to ask her anything about net neutrality. They'll ask her how she was treated, what she's going to do next and how she feels about the previous and current administration. She'll say something mildly negative about Trump. Trump will tweet about it, and everyone will start talking about Trump's tweet.
the myopic eyesight of the masses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then could the downvoters please explain to me how this male is supposed to be female?
Simple: A person's gender is a part of their personal identity. Chelsea Manning says that their gender is female, even if their biological sex is male. As a consequence of respect for their personal identity as a member of society (and NOT fixating on their sex organs, which is frankly creepy), most people will refer to a trans* person as the gender they identify as, not the sex they were born with. Or, if uncertain…
We understand that if somebody wants to kill themself, they need help. Sure they have the right to hate life, but we want to help them be happy, rather than accept their depression and help them kill themself.
Similarly, if somebody is transgender, they also need help, and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. I don't see why it is so controversial to say that. In many states, however, if a counselor tries to help somebody with sexual identity issues, they can get their license revoked. I'm all for tolerance, but that doesn't mean we should consider a significant mental disorder as "normal". People with gender issues need help, just like depressed, schizophrenic, and anxious people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are political assassinations but they are assassinations by crazies. If you think these are government plots or that the man is secretly sending ninjas to rub out potential whistleblowers, you have to come up with some evidence otherwise it's just conspiracy theorizing. We might as well talk of alien abductions.
> These are political assassinations but they are assassinations by crazies. Some of them, we don't know who did them at all (e.g. MLK). But even if that was the case, it's not difficult to manipulate a "crazy" to do something, especially if you have both crazies and guns in abundance in a country. It would be a nice way to avoid blame for the whole thing, and you can even have some mafia figure/ex-cop collaborator k…
It's not difficult to say it's not difficult. Again, it's a completely evidence-free claim.
You think there's much evidence
There isn't any evidence the government is taking out hits on politically inconvenient figures in the US. "There can't possibly be any evidence, look at some other (vaguely described, non-specific place/event) where there is also no evidence, QED" is pretty much classic conspiracy-theorist logic (if you can call it that).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you say so, then by definition that's the way it is. I cannot help but notice, though, that apparently all subthreads critical of Manning and/or commenting on the gender thing have been not only heavily downvoted but marked as 'flagged', while some fairly vitriolic ones in Manning's favor have not. Not trying to be polemical, and not out to kindle further unproductive discussion, but I would be interested to see t…
There's no need for "unofficial political guidelines" here: that comment breaks the official guidelines and doesn't belong on a site whose purpose is to gratify our intellectual curiosity. There are other places on the Internet for the tedious back-and-forth of "you don't get it" "no you don't get it" etc., but that sort of conversational purgatory is not what we're after here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When we refer to things, we use words that convey our perception of them. We are not talking about cross-dressers. We are talking about transgender individuals. You wouldn't even be able to notice them standing in front of you once their transition is complete.
Then they might lead me to believe something I wouldn't believe if I knew more. It's not just about what I can see. (I see your point about the word "perception", probably a bad choice of words) But sure, maybe I'd even internalize it and accept it if I knew it but they appeared very convincing, at least for everyday interaction purposes. I probably am more resistant to that than I otherwise would be given the social…
I don't understand that part. I think there are some concepts that are confusing you. All of the transgender individuals that I have known from before their transition pass as their new gender without any issues. The only way anybody would know if you told them.
Story time:
You know how men always like to boast and compare their masculinity while drinking? Well, one time we were out drinking with friends. A man from my high-school (who was a girl last I saw him) was with us. He is quite manly, has a beard and looks like what you would expect a fashionable young man in his mid twenties to look like.
After a few beer one of the guys turns toward the man in question and, without having a clue that this is a transgender individual and tells him: "We know how it is with you lucky guys who hit the genetic lottery and are so manly. With a beard like that I bet all the girls must be throwing themselves at you. I must be half the man you are." ... My jaw dropped.
It was a ridiculous situation to witness but it shows just how easy it is to be next to someone who has gone through a complete transition without having a clue. If you live in a city, I'm sure that you have called at least one or two transgender individuals by their new pronoun without being aware of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no need for "unofficial political guidelines" here: that comment breaks the official guidelines and doesn't belong on a site whose purpose is to gratify our intellectual curiosity. There are other places on the Internet for the tedious back-and-forth of "you don't get it" "no you don't get it" etc., but that sort of conversational purgatory is not what we're after here.
I can't help but notice that warnings are only ever given to one side of certain issues, though.
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=by:dang%20cognitive%20bias&sor...
If you see comments that you think violate the guidelines, please flag them or email us about it at hn@ycombinator.com.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no need for "unofficial political guidelines" here: that comment breaks the official guidelines and doesn't belong on a site whose purpose is to gratify our intellectual curiosity. There are other places on the Internet for the tedious back-and-forth of "you don't get it" "no you don't get it" etc., but that sort of conversational purgatory is not what we're after here.
I can't help but notice that warnings are only ever given to one side of certain issues, though.
I disagree with what she did, she probably made the world a much less safe place and caused thousands if not millions of deaths through wikileaks role in inciting the Arab spring. Still I'm convinced she did it with the best of intentions and the genuine belief that she would make the world more peaceful and open. I guess she was naive so I'm glad to see her released early.
One might assume that if what she leaked upset people to the point of revolution that there was something they had a right to be upset about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> even if she wasn't trans Who is gunning trans (just because they are trans)?
Probably most notable case is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Teena (the story was made into the movie Boys Don't Cry). You can find quite a few more on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unlawfully_killed_tran... .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really not. Some people do feel this way and pointing it out isn't vitriol. The worst thing that can happen to a cause is some crazy jackass being held up by the media as the spokesperson. I was on board for the tea party until the media grabbed a few nut bags and made them the de facto spokespeople for the cause. It was purely about limited government until it got co-opted.
I feel as though I am gathered at the feet of a dispirited grandparent, being told tales of the purity they would have espoused if they hadn't been so rudely interrupted by the persistent existence of the world undermining their certainty.