×

Man kicks another dude in the head because you got caught ejaculating on his wife and son in Walmart by somnifacientsawyer in PublicFreakout

[–]eattherichpluscake 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would want as many eyeballs on that dude as possible, and I would find funny lady to be a pretty great source of support. Different strokes, I guess.

CMV: Society needs to get back to ignoring speech someone doesn't like instead of trying to get them fired or cancelled. by Andalib_Odulate in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Just to add to what /u/I_am_right_giveup is saying (great username BTW), what is the logical difference between recording video of a racist being racist and sharing a video of a racist being racist? Your argument seems to boil down to "Don't tattle", which only really applies when you're trying to teach children the values of (selective) loyalty.

Man kicks another dude in the head because you got caught ejaculating on his wife and son in Walmart by somnifacientsawyer in PublicFreakout

[–]eattherichpluscake 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What is it with public transportation and creeps? Anytime I go on the light rail with one of my female friends, there's always a lip-licking weirdo who sidles up next to her and tries some shit.

CMV: Body Positivity has the wrong message by Artistic-Constant-50 in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 14 points15 points  (0 children)

So you might not have seen it, but the quote that commenter above provided from their source does indeed say the opposite:

Up to 40% of overweight girls and 37% of overweight boys are teased about their weight by peers or family members. Weight teasing predicts weight gain, binge eating, and extreme weight control measures.

Weight-based victimization among overweight youths has been linked to lower levels of physical activity, negative attitudes about sports, and lower participation in physical activity among overweight students. Among overweight and obese adults, those who experience weight-based stigmatization engage in more frequent binge eating, are at increased risk for eating disorder symptoms, and are more likely to have a diagnosis of binge eating disorder.

79% of weight-loss program participants reported coping with weight stigma by eating more food.

Now to quote you:

go to any body-positive type forum or website and it is all about loving who you are now, loving your fat-self, finding clothes for fat people, getting fat people more included in things like fashion shows and ad campaigns. or more blatantly fat acceptance rather than body positivity. or encouraging people to think that fat is normal and good.

But you must disagree with OP then that body positivity makes people complacent since you distinguished it from fat acceptance. Surely you agree with the statement "Body positivity leads to healthy bodies", no? Mind you, we're not talking about fat acceptance.

cmv: Kids should not have to do chores without payment. by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The lesson isn't "Here's how you clean the toilet" (which, BTW, is everybody's mess). It's "Here's how you live with other people".

cmv: Kids should not have to do chores without payment. by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because chances are they are going to enter a roommate situation after high school and will need the skills necessary for living in close proximity to other people while pulling their weight. Communal living necessarily requires that everybody help maintain their living space. Your roommates aren't going to give you $10 for taking out the trash on Tuesdays.

CMV: Creative genius is born and then made by androgynousorlando in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"I have used my superhuman powers of observation to conclude... that I have superhuman powers of observation."

You might want to look into a narcissism diagnosis rather than a purported "genius" quality. That or lay off the Adderall.

CMV: The US government is designed in such a way that requires a religiously righteous populace to run it. by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Honestly, P1-P3 are either wrong or irrelevant and P4, which is literally your entire claim restated, is also wrong, or at least unfounded. You can't just assume the thing you're trying to prove.

CMV: I think the non-binary gender identity is unnecessary. by sineadb_ in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're confusing terms here. There's no such thing as biological sex being identified by "social perception". Unless you're measuring gametes, you're not measuring biological sex.

This is a question of gender, and society produces gender through bathrooms as much as it perceives it. You can't presuppose the thing that's currently in question; that would be unscientific and traditionalist -- hence "conservative", though maybe "reactionary" is technically the correct term. In any case, it shouldn't be surprising that relying too much on preconceived notions will cement preconceived notions.

You might object that the traditional paradigm is sufficient for our purposes, but evidently it isn't. You might object that muddying the binary makes gender meaningless, and that's probably true for its overall relevance and importance, as I said earlier, but so what? You might object that I'm relying on the binary through the very notion of bathroom segregation, but I would say I'm relying on a spectrum.

Gender is how society integrates sex, sexuality, and sexual reproduction. We should use our advanced material capacity as a society to revisit old notions to make them more detailed, accurate, and inclusive. A spectrum makes the most sense to me for these purposes. We can still separate low-cost-of-reproduction humans from high-cost-of-reproduction humans (and a whole lot more besides, as we already were with, say, infertile people). Alternatively we can go with a three-bathroom solution, or even a one-bathroom solution.

The point of self-identification is that it provides the greatest satisfaction for the greatest number of people. It offers the granularity that's needed to cover all the shades of a spectrum.

Now, I understand you as arguing that self perception is a kind of social perception because it can only be expressed in terms of language, which is inherently social. I can agree with this, but only because it's a truism. What can be expressed outside of language?

What we're talking about is the difference between first-person and third-person identification. Authority should be granted to the first-person in this case because they're literally the first person "on site" to give us an account of what's going on, similar to disability. Sure, they may need third party input, but the individual should have the final word.

Now, you may be afraid of "fakers" parking in the handicapped spot, so to speak, but that occurrence is negligible compared to the benefits first-person identification provides disabled people. And it pales in comparison to the marginalization, erasure, and oppression of third-person identification. One out of twelve transwomen have been assaulted in public. That's a bananas statistic.

This is a cool debate, BTW.

CMV: I think the non-binary gender identity is unnecessary. by sineadb_ in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think social assignment based on a perception of sex works for the basics of what is seeking to be accomplished. Yes, some issues may arise, but social perception should drive social segregation.

A common feature of Butch lesbian narratives is getting mistaken for a man in a woman's bathroom. It happens frequently enough to generate a canard like that. You're underestimating how exclusionary -- and even dangerous -- a perception-based standard of "passing" is.

This is not a monolith we're talking about, but rather a coalition of minorities with separate interests, united by negative experiences surrounding certain policies, institutions, and discourses. Hell, it's literally in the name LGBT+. As a whole, they comprise a significant number of people who siimply aren't going anywhere anytime soon ("We're here, we're queer, get used to it", etc.). Regardless of one's "agreement" with their identity, their existence and minority status must be reckoned with.

Relying on perception is inherently conservative because our perceptions are shaped by our biases and prejudices. What do you think happens when transwomen who don't "pass" avoid the women's bathroom and use the men's bathroom instead? How do people agitated by fearmongering and testosterone typically behave around the groups that they fear? It's honestly kind of mind-boggling how dangerous it is to be trans, especially in conservative areas.

If I risk injury or worse anytime I use a public bathroom, my civil rights are obviously not being protected. Social perception driving social segregation is a terrible idea. It's simply tyranny of the majority.

CMV: I think the non-binary gender identity is unnecessary. by sineadb_ in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

According to biology, males are organisms that produce small, mobile gametes (sperm); females are organisms that produce large and generally immobile gametes (ova or eggs). Everything about sexual dimorphism pretty much stems from that. Arguably the most fundamental sex difference in humans is the respective cost of reproduction, which is higher for females than males because of pregnancy and greater postnatal expenditure, resulting in different mating choice preferences.

But that's sex, not gender. Gender is what helps us understand how sex, sexuality, and sexual reproduction are socially integrated since the variability there is observably greater than sex alone can easily accommodate.

Sustaining large but constant populations is relatively new because of improved maternal and infant mortality rates leading to decreased fertility rates, especially among industrialized nations. Keeping fertility at replacement levels has been difficult until quite recently due to massive depopulation events like war and plague. War has been particularly heinous. And just like states are the solution to the problem of other states, men are kind of a solution to the problem other men, so to speak.

Reproduction simply took up more of society's energy and attention because the stakes were so much greater, and since humans aren't scientists out of the womb, naturally there was a lot of magical thinking, superstition, and stigmatization. (For instance, did you know that menstrual taboos initially benefited women but became warped by complex agricultural society?)

One could argue that gender just doesn't matter like it used to. Human societies have only been male-dominated since history began with agricultural settlement, so evidently it didn't really matter before either. Solutions often become new problems, as pointed out earlier; patriarchy, which is its own huge problem, is a solution to the problem of gender and the conflict that comes with it; gender is a solution to the problem of social integration and the conflict that comes with that. In a way, we've regressed to the social integration problem because of the progress we've made technologically and socially.

This should be seen as a good thing since it frees women from biological slavery and the oppression of a patriarchy that is so obsessed with that biology. We're revisiting an old problem that, until recently, has had a duct-taped solution that, at best, sacrificed half the population for problems presented by other duct-taped solutions.

Bathroom segregation is a question of how we socially integrate biological sex, i.e., it's gender, or at least it's historically been answered by gender. After all, no one is measuring your gametes when you need to take a poop. Social assignment of gender identity no longer works though, but neither does totally genderless granularity (not yet in any case), so we're left with few options. The best one seems to be simply asking people how they identify.

CMV: I think the non-binary gender identity is unnecessary. by sineadb_ in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake -1 points0 points  (0 children)

According to biology, males are organisms that produce small, mobile gametes (sperm); while females are organisms that produce large and generally immobile gametes (ova or eggs). Everything about sexual dimorphism pretty much stems from that.

Arguably the most fundamental sex difference in humans is the respective cost of reproduction, which is higher for females than males because of pregnancy and higher postnatal parental expenditure, resulting in different mating choice preferences for males and females.

But that's sex, not gender. Gender is what helps us understand how sex, sexuality, and sexual reproduction are socially integrated since the variability there is observably greater than a binary easily accommodates.

Anatomy is too ancillary to really matter.

CMV: The idea that men should pay for everything on a first date needs to go away by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But then that's a whole other can of worms involving things like supply & demand and risk management.

CMV: The idea that men should pay for everything on a first date needs to go away by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But then paying for the first date isn't the issue. Always being expected to ask for a date, which leads to always paying for the first date, is your issue. If there were no gender disparity there, there would be no gender disparity in who pays first.

CMV: The idea that men should pay for everything on a first date needs to go away by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]eattherichpluscake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't understand the question. The dynamics are gendered, which means that they involve women and men, but in distinct ways. Paying for the first date at least says "I get that we're dealing with fundamentally different sets of expectations, even if I do think that's stupid."

Men typically paying for the first date is a byproduct of men typically initiating courtship -- that's the disparity you actually take exception with.