Hey man, people can drive what they want, saying their car is ridiculous is not cool

Wake up call for what? They won last election with a corporate candidate and have a decent chance of doing it this time too. Like the post says, they don’t care that much about losing, their life isn’t threatened by it.

The only thing that can be done is to keep on voting for the non-fascist candidate hoping that one day both of the main parties will present one that fits the category.

They can scream all they want, it won’t get them elected.

The post is exaggerating, but it’s true that after one huge loss (or even a series of losses in a row), the Republican Party will have to reform itself to appeal more to moderates (aka non-fascist right-wing voters).

It’s an exaggeration. They probably mean “the current Republican Party” won’t exist anymore, because they’ll have to restructure their whole party line if they want to appeal to more voters.

Political systems have collapsed countless times in history.

Due to not enough people voting? Or due to violent revolutions? Because the first one doesn’t have a great track record, as far as I know.

How do we then get him and the Dems to fix the system?

First step is getting Republicans to stop being literal fascists. And that means that they have to lose so many times in a row that they have to rethink the whole party strategy to try getting elected again.

Then, once republicans go back to being just corporate shills, Dems will have to actually push left because the “we’re not Satan” strategy won’t work anymore.

It’s about plates and sql injection.

And (by how I understood it) the point of the I1I1 plate was that it wasn’t easily discernible and the camera couldn’t identify it correctly to link it to the owner, but the police knew who it was nonetheless because it’s always the same guy that already got caught. I might be wrong though, it’s just a funny comic and isn’t probably meant to be looked into that deeply.

“He had it coming,” says Christopher Null, a journalist who has written previously for WIRED about the challenges his last name presents.

This is peak nottheonion material

You also have to “change facts” to have the Bobby Tables xkcd apply here, because this is about plates and not children.

It doesn’t have to apply 100% to be a relevant xkcd, they just posted it because, like op’s pic, it’s about a person trying to be clever by messing with speed cameras, but everyone would know whose fault is it the second time it happens because of how weird the plate is.

Your one obviously applies more, but there’s no need to gatekeep.

Your concept of gender sounds alright. I would just disagree with the term prefer, if you think about yourself and your gender - there is just a way you express your gender that is no really conscious. So I personally would say: that if your gender expression and identification is closer to your biological sex you that is called cis and if your gender expression and identification is closer to the opposite biological sex that’s called trans.

I used “prefer” because I figured it’s also a matter of preference in how would you like to be treated (as a male, a female or whatever), but yes, I don’t really “think” about how I want to express myself so I guess that’s mostly subconscious.

But I might have something to bring the concept of being trans more closer to you - in your thoughts you projection of yourself aligns with your biological sex - imagine it would not. Imagine in your thoughts and dreams you have different gender than the one your biology suggest.

I’ve heard about it and tried thinking that way, but I really can’t imagine it from an outside perspective. As you said, I don’t really feel like my gender is that important either, so I guess that’s common for cis people. Like, I’m a male, but if I was born female I think my biggest “annoyances” would be the expectations society would have on me, and it would just be (probably much) harder to go against them. I imagine I would’ve just turned out tomboyish. …or at least that’s what I thought before I learned there’s a lot of trans people who don’t experience Body Dysphoria and/or aren’t interested in surgery, then I got really confused and figured I’ll probably never know for sure unless I meet an alternate universe version of myself or something.

I can recommend contrapoints, she has also a video on trangsgender ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdvM_pRfuFM ) and there are interviews out there were she talks more about her personal experience. She is rather philosophical so you might like it.

I’ll have a look at it, thanks!

Than I worked together with a trans girl on a few projects and we became friends and the interesting part for me was, that from the beginning I had the vibe with her I have around women. Which helped me to put my thoughts around that topic into places.

The vibe, you say… that’s interesting, I’d be curious to see if I ever experience something like that.

So what do you think gender is?

The idea I got so far is that it’s kind of a social construct of “ways to be perceived by yourself and the world” that is, so far, typical of people born (or at least, raised) with a specific sex. If your preferred way of expressing yourself is mostly conforming with what “the world” expects from your biological sex you’re cis, otherwise you’re trans. That’s roughly how I thought of it until now, tell me if I misunderstood something.

Ok, so you making a more broader almost philosophical point, that religious experience and gender identity different than hetero are both results of people feeling something wrong (in a complex sense) with their life and come up with an explanation (difficult to find the right words), acceptance of which made them feel better. Did I get your point this time?

Kinda, I guess? It’s still not there because I know there’s people who don’t feel Gender Dysphoria for their current sex but only Euphoria for another, but you could say feeling like something “could be better” is still feeling “something wrong”, in a sense.

I’m not trans, but one of my best friends is. I would think that the best way to understand would be to just meet trans folks and talk. You sound like you come from a genuine point of being curious and not understanding something that you don’t know which is always ok, and I’m sorry to hear that you had bad experience talking about it online. But that is a nature of a sensitive topic. You can ask me, I might help to clarify some things. But keep in mind, I’m not an expert so verify the things I say and also I don’t speak from my own experience.

Yeah, it’s definitely the best way, but I don’t really know any trans person and I don’t think there’s any in my area, or at least none who came out. And even if there was one I wouldn’t really want to ask them delicate questions like this unless I’m very close to them. I know it’s a very delicate subject even to touch online, I imagine irl people would feel even more pressure.

So you don’t even know what gender is, but you chime in anyway - internet discussion at it best.

I’m plastering this discussion with “I think”, “as far as I know” and the likes exactly because I’m not fully knowledgeable on the matter. If I’m getting stuff wrong you could correct me instead of simply telling me I’m wrong.

Again, I don’t doubt that religious people exist. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.

I’m not. I’m saying “one is real and the other isn’t” works only if you compare God to Trans people instead of the concept of Gender.

So by this comparison you think that trans people believe to be trans in the same way religious people believe that god exists? Just need to clarify that I got you correct.

I’m not Trans and I’m not Religious so I have no actual way to tell. Only someone who is both could actually have a meaningful say in this discussion, and even then it’s just the opinion of one person and it wouldn’t represent the whole group(s). What I personally think (and again, this might be entirely wrong as I have no direct knowledge of it), is that they’re people who felt something wrong with their life and gave it an explanation that lets them live better. That explanation might be true or not, but as long as it makes them live better and doesn’t hurt others (and this is where unfortunately most Religious people fail), it doesn’t really matter for it to work and be accepted as a natural part of society.

I personally know no Trans person and it’s genuinely hard to talk about this online without being mistaken as one of the thousand different camps who hate Trans people for one dumb reason or another, so my knowledge about the subject is limited to this, unfortunately. If you know/think it’s different I’d be glad to hear why.

Also asking people to prove their gender in general is considered rude. If someone says she is a women, you don’t normally ask them to prove it - would kind of border on sexual harassment(joke). Not sure why it would be different for trans folk.

That’s Sex, not Gender, though. Gender is unrelated to physical appearance, as far as I know (and is thus impossible to prove).

What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both.

Not definite ones that don’t bring more questions, is what I’m saying. We have the Big Bang, but how did it happen? What caused it? That’s a gap that will probably never be filled.

You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were (…) comparing existence of god and trans people. So which one is it?

To be clear I’m not doubting that Religions people exists, I doubt that god exists in the capacity they claim it to exist.

And I don’t doubt Trans people exist, I doubt “Gender” exists as more than a concept. I’m comparing a “concrete” God with a “concrete” Gender, and Religious people with Trans people.

Just like Religious people can exist without proof of God existing, Trans people can exist without Gender actually being a biological, provable and irrefutable thing. You’re saying “one is real and the other is not” because you’re conflating the two.

And by the way the whole point of believing is that you don’t need actual proof - if you have evidence you don’t need to believe, you know.

Isn’t a major talking point in LGBTQ culture also that asking for “proof” of being trans is rude and you only have to “feel” like one to be one? I’m not that informed in the culture but I know there’s a subset of “Transmedicalists” that are usually shunned because of that.

Yes and when we study those empirical we come op with rather different explanations than offered by religion. The “God of Gaps” is getting smaller.

Afaik we still didn’t find any possible explanation for either that doesn’t just bring up more questions. It got smaller for a long time but we’re at a point where we’re probably not ever going further unless someone does the biggest scientific breakthrough of history.

But again. I can go outside an meet trans people. You can have different explanation to why there is such phenomenon as trans people and come up with different explanations and mechanisms. You can’t do quite the same thing with god. But sure you are welcome to propose an empirical experiment on nature of god.

Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people. And both have (usually) no objective, biological way to discern them from cis people or atheists. If you want to go further, there’s also people who claim they talked with God or whatever. It’s all claims, as far as I know, on both sides. You can’t empirically test well something that, by definition, can’t have an objective tell.

Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied. The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness, and so on. They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).

To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.

The way I see it, Religion and Gender are both social constructs that exist to make life easier for people who need it (or, at least that’s what the original purpose of religion was).

There’s no definite, set-in-stone proof for either being true (as far as I know, do correct me if I’m wrong), but as long as they make someone’s life better without making others’ life worse, I see no issue with either existing.

It’s not really a fair comparison to say “God doesn’t exist, LGBTQ people do”, when one is a concept and the other is people. Religious people do exist, and the concept of “Gender” is just as vague and undefined as the one for “God”.

The reason why LGBTQ people are (rightfully) seen better than religious people is that they don’t force people to “join” them and don’t treat different people as the scum of the earth.

I mean, sexuality is a spectrum. It’s statistically unlikely that a large part of the population is at the exact borders of the spectrum and not even slightly in between.

Especially since afaik physical attraction is just a matter of appearance, and there’s very masculine women or very feminine men.

Okay, I missed the first point before, thanks.

So about the second one, you’re saying that those videos “even pleas from victims’ families don’t serve to shake loose” are all under investigation and the family can see them, but are forbidden from releasing them to the public because it would be detrimental to the process?

That’s reassuring, but then I’m confused by this:

In 79 of those deaths, ProPublica confirmed that body-worn camera video exists. But more than a year later, authorities or victims’ families had released the footage of only 33 incidents.

ProPublica’s review shows that withholding body-worn camera footage from the public has become so entrenched in some cities that even pleas from victims’ families don’t serve to shake the video loose.

If getting the footage is relatively easy, why can’t those videos be released even if the families want it? Am I misreading it and is the situation more “families have the video, but not the clearance to show it to the public”?

I think that already requires some legal knowledge poor families might not have. I’m not American so I don’t know the procedure, correct me if I’m wrong, but issuing a subpoena doesn’t feel like an easy thing from what I read.