Thank you for sharing this man, sorry you have to endure all that. Fuck Trump, fuck dementia frfr. Sending love 💕

her: “you better not be pretending to be getting vaporized by a nuclear radiation blast when i get home”

my high ass:

This is one of the first comments I have seen on lemmy that truly feels like old school reddit. You applied your professional knowledge to that fairly unkind commenter not only to correct them but also to express something many might not know!

Very cool of you keep it up champ :)

ah there’s our miscommunication! i am not arguing anything i just misunderstood at first and offered a possible solution/additional context

but i was wrong so i issued my apologies and asked for clarification :)

you stated there was something that was a problem with the reporting, and i inaccurately surmised that it had to do with trans people experiencing hate. what was it in reality?

i literally don’t know what you are talking about, lol. just asking for clarification because my initial reading was clearly wrong :)

deleted by creator

well i am missing your point i guess, sorry. could you rephrase what you are saying ? im quite lost

edit: like what is “the problem” involved here? what are the journalists saying that is misleading?

ty!

absolutely true but Dolly Parton did not have to face transphobic harassment and violence

very very very important distinction

Removed by mod

I’m not sure I am perfectly following you—what should the authors have said?

I am definitely mistakenly misreading you here, sorry for the inconvenience!

(significantly edited to reflect my intent; also if any others could help me out, i don’t mean to bug this person and annoy them)

where do you cite this five grade model?

the world health organization is not quite in line with you here (CW, hopefully obvious explicit discussion of mutilation) thanks !

this should hilight to us the outsized effect transphobia has on discourse.

if we were to believe the line that “we’re just concerned about people getting mutilated” we must naturally expect to see that 97% margin of outrage at breast implants, hair implants, weight management surgery etc. for cis folk.

and we don’t. here and there you might hear an evangelical getting upsetti spaghetti avout Ozempic et al but transphobic talking points dominate, in vast disproportion to actual individual cases.

you discovered the importance of multiple non-associated fact checking institutions holding one another accountable :)

yes, exactly what i am referencing :)

fair enough. better than waiting centuries and still having slavery codified 150 years after we did a whole civil war about things.

as soon as we get ranked choice voting i’m starting a party whose whole platform is to shred the constitution and rewrite it every eight years. (open to suggestions on this timeline this part is mostly sarcasm)

what the heck is the purpose of license plates if not to be read so as to identify and prevent driving hazards?

here’s a hint: the constitution says nothing about license plates. (it also says absolutely nothing about assault rifles and other massively deadly weapons, coincidentally.) making appeals to this ancient ass document like it’s holy scripture is almost as cringe as referencing literal religious scripture when writing policy.

“but license plate readers are an infringement on my privacy—“ you know what else is an infringement? fucking cops who can read your plates, pull you over, and potentially fucken kill you because you didn’t perfectly perform the authoritarian script we impose on drivers in an already uniquely stressful situation, something that happens, especially when you happen to be a person of color. the cool thing about cameras is they don’t kill.

i want safe roads with safe drivers that kill fewer people per year. i want cops that interact with fewer people so fewer state-sponsored hate crimes happen. to that end, i’d take in any universe some cameras that can see my license plates and fine me over the authoritarian residing army we have in our streets today.

the constitution can eat dirt.

fiduciary duty requires that directors of corporations protect the interests of shareholders’ investments—including maximizing profits where reasonable and within the bounds of the law.

even if technically illegal on paper (which i’m not sure it is), so long as there is no enforcement or accountability, t-mobile and similar entities have literally no reason do do better. they are literally just holding up their end of the law.

in other words, this unfair treatment isn’t just one of many unfortunate flukes. it is literally baked into the system as a requirement.

To clarify, my original thesis was: “If I said I had a sincere counterargument I’d be lying” and that’s all I am speaking to.

Counterarguments exist for sure. So maybe we agree. But if I told you I could sincerely counterargue or even entertain them (as OP suggests is necessary) I would be lying. That’s all I was saying. :)

I didn’t originally state that past observations are rigorous; that is the conclusion of the entire body of science and human understanding since its inception. I absolutely get what you are saying, but unless you can cite a really good point-by-point takedown of John Locke, David Hume, Karl Popper, and the like, none of this holds any water.

Put very simply, the common epithet, “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” has its roots in meaningful philosophy. Past experience is literally all we have, and any system of thought that discounts this is operating on less than nothing.

Sadly, you seem really out of your depth here. I won’t argue any further because of this, sorry.

I recommend reading up on basic philosophy of science, human knowledge, and methodology.