The Don't Say Gay bill

I don't care. I care that I can be coerced into doing so.

Jordon Peterson was killed over this!
He didn't use a pronoun, and the trans person shot him!
He's a holy martyr!
He didn't write the sequel to his shitty book, and isn't doing press for it right now!
That's a thought tulpa created in the minds of his mourning fans!
I'm totally not insane!

coerced?

Paladin: He ...
That person: call me 'they'
Paladin: DON'T COERCE ME INTO CALLING YOU SOMETHING I DON'T BELIEVE YOU ARE!

No one is coercing you. Yet you continue to say that is why you are against it. That tells me you are lying. You care, obviously. So, why?

LOL, so I was right on both counts. Ze/zir were strawpersons and you are arguing in bad faith.

Because again, you aren’t this stupid. You have to know that non-binary gender expression goes back to our earliest recorded history and is found in almost society.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender

You are clearly just FF but with more words and less YouTube videos. You aren’t here to learn or share knowledge but only to ‘push back. I will treat you as such from now on.

Have a good weekend.

I told you.

You think it's not happening. Okay. You're wrong, but okay.

If I'm right, that's why I care. I can only answer your question so many times.

If I'm wrong, f I'm concerned about nothing, then just let me be concerned about nothing.

And if it's really nothing, why do you care about this topic?

*Puts on an armband for dead Jordan Peterson*
*Sings "love lifts us up" in sobs and blubbers *

Thanks. I believe you are in the Bay Area?

So between Seattle, LA and SF (not exactly conservative strongholds) the three of us have a grand total of two known persons who use non-traditional pronouns.

This is obviously a scourge that must be dealt with before it brings about the collapse of society!

Dude, you said it wasn't a thing. I provided links that show you, yes, it is a thing. Apparently, evidence will not persuade you that your own experience--colorful though it may be--is not the totality of experience.

So what? I'm not denying anyone their identity.

I question whether many children who increasingly identify that way aren't actually being pushed into it by their parents.

I maintain that I cannot be rightfully compelled to accept or endorse someone's chosen identity.

Take your bat and ball and go home, then.

A: "Not a thing."

O: "I know two examples of the thing."

A: "Based on three samples which produced two examples of the thing, I declare the thing is not a thing."

"Okay, even if it is a thing..."

you still haven't defined CRT nor how it's being applied to public education.

despite long since having been provided multiple links.

If only Jordon Peterson were alive so he could gin this up out of nothing.
He's slandering and slurring angels now.

Oh dear nothing... not only was there misgendering, but also sexual harrassment.

Although it'd be true to form that you're okay with that sort of "banter"...

I care about this topic because I am always against hurting anyone just for the sake of hurting someone.

I care about your response because I can see you are lying. you keep saying you don't care, then respond with I care about being coerced. So, you do care. you care more about not being wrong than you do about whether or not you are hurting someone. And that is wrong.

Jenee, you're so totally wrong here it's hard for me to know where to begin.

Let me summarize for you.
1. I don't care what identity anyone chooses. Be whatever you want.
2. I will choose for myself whether I accept or endorse the identity someone chooses.
3. No coercion or punishment against me for #2 is legitimate.
4. If someone is "hurt" (really, you mean "offended") because of #2, so be it.

If 1 is true, 2 and 3 don't even need to be stated, and 4 just becomes nonsensical.


It's like saying "I'm never gonna drop the n-bomb....but if I did!!".
Like, no, you don't need the other part.

See, you don't get to make that choice in the workplace. Not if it creates an unwelcoming environment.

4. If someone is "hurt" (really, you mean "offended") because of #2, so be it.
2. I will choose for myself whether I accept or endorse the identity someone chooses.

So, this is why you care. You do not want to be "inconvenienced" (i.e. corrected) even if it means you are hurting someone. and just because you choose offended or hurt does not change how that person felt about what you said.

All this could have been avoided if you had just been honest in the first place. You do care and this is why.

Also unacceptable. Obviously.

I think I have been specific about my terms. An individual either satisfies those terms or they don't.

In French, the plural pronoun is used in formal settings or when children are addressing adults.

Damn French.

FREEDUMB FRIES!!!1!

Certain members of WF play this passive "look, I'm just a stickler for rigid Robocop rules, my hands are tied " routine.
They get it from Antonin Scalia.
It was bullshit with him, it's bullshit from them.
Life is messy, if they didn't bend rules, they'd be fucking dead.
That they continue to breathe is proof of the lie.
Don't fall for this D&D Dungeon Master stuff.

You don't.

There's that cute little strawman. "Respect muh pronouns or you are weak men with tiny peens."

Nothing makes your case like petty shit that would be tired on a playground.

But only if it doesn't fit your preconceived notions...
And how many LGBT kids where pushed/forced into behaving/identify "straight" by their religious parents?!?
But that is fine by you as well, because then you can justify calling them by your preferred nouns for them based on their physical cis appearance...

Guess you'll be quitting the board then in outrage over yourself.

I may have misread your posts, but it seems to me you are in favor of a law saying ALL teachers should be punished and cannot under any circumstance mention whether or not they are male or female, cannot say whether or not to call them Mr./Mrs., cannot refer to another student by he/she/him/her, you are effectively, in favor of punishing all teachers for the (possible) bad performance of a few.

I love how @Paladin has distilled his argument down to "I don't want to be forced not to be openly bigoted to a certain group of people."

I can kind of see his concern. Folk will be expecting us to respect people who identify as Republican next.

Or pre-op "Libertarians".

Matt's on fire today.

It’s more/worse than that.

It is “I don't want to be judged for being openly bigoted to a certain group of people."