NationStates

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Sirocca wrote:
Not if the progressive left elitists in the education and media positions have anything to say about it.

Really, I believe we are heading for some kind of major shock. It seems inevitable.

It's only a matter of time before even saying the word gender becomes offensive. We've already got leftists advocating for "genderless theybies".

I'm not going to lie, I think it's very frightening. Especially as a millenial.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
..."Theybies"?

Last time I checked, the "ba-" in "baby" does not imply sex nor gender, it is a part of the word, a word that is GENDER-NEUTRAL mind you (you refer to a girl or a boy as a baby, no distinctions needed).

That's part of the reason why it is dumb. It's also pretty dumb in general to pretend like biological sex isn't a thing.

Then again, those who unironically believe in "theybies" most likely aren't the sharpest tools in the shed.

Sirocca wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:It's only a matter of time before even saying the word gender becomes offensive. We've already got leftists advocating for "genderless theybies".

I'm not going to lie, I think it's very frightening. Especially as a millenial.

Agreed. I'm a college student myself, and I can unfortunately see stuff like that becoming the norm.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:That's part of the reason why it is dumb. It's also pretty dumb in general to pretend like biological sex isn't a thing.

Then again, those who unironically believe in "theybies" most likely aren't the sharpest tools in the shed.

Agreed, but it doesn't matter. Plenty of activists will take up the cause anyway, and the pressure will become great enough that it can lead to policy. We formerly believed that people who threw around buzzwords like "microaggression" and "white privilege" would simply work in low level positions, unfortunately people like that are getting highly influential jobs instead. The same thing will probably happen with people who advocate for theybies as well.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Sirocca wrote:
Not if the progressive left elitists in the education and media positions have anything to say about it.

Really, I believe we are heading for some kind of major shock. It seems inevitable.

It's only a matter of time before even saying the word gender becomes offensive. We've already got leftists advocating for "genderless theybies".

I mean, all in all that’s a fairly harmless thing to advocate for, and I highly doubt it’s something being widely advocated for outside whatever group or groups that advocate for it which I sense a is pretty small in number.

Sirocca wrote:

Joohan wrote:
Serious like the plague

Alex Jones has quite a lot of bullshit. Are you saying a lot of people here actually listen to him?
Are you just trying to yank me?

The line between sarcasm and actual opinion is very thin in here.

Tag

Gospel Power wrote:Tag

We have the "bookmark topic" function for a reason. "Tagging" threads is considered spam here.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Sirocca wrote:
Not if the progressive left elitists in the education and media positions have anything to say about it.

Really, I believe we are heading for some kind of major shock. It seems inevitable.

It's only a matter of time before even saying the word gender becomes offensive. We've already got leftists advocating for "genderless theybies".

I'm not quite sure if that's more frightening in its extremism or its mental retardation.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Sirocca wrote:
Not if the progressive left elitists in the education and media positions have anything to say about it.

Really, I believe we are heading for some kind of major shock. It seems inevitable.

It's only a matter of time before even saying the word gender becomes offensive. We've already got leftists advocating for "genderless theybies".

And we've got rightists advocating for murder of liberals. Does that represent the whole right?

The South Falls wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:It's only a matter of time before even saying the word gender becomes offensive. We've already got leftists advocating for "genderless theybies".

And we've got rightists advocating for murder of liberals. Does that represent the whole right?

And leftists that call for violent disarmament of gun owners...

Every side has its skeletons in the closet, but it is best to keep 'em locked in there nice and tight.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

The South Falls wrote:And we've got rightists advocating for murder of liberals. Does that represent the whole right?

And leftists that call for violent disarmament of gun owners...

Every side has its skeletons in the closet, but it is best to keep 'em locked in there nice and tight.

That's entirely correct.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:I'm pretty sure that 1984 doesn't target authoritarianism, but totalitarianism.

But totalitarian is the extreme end of authoritarianism, so it's not technically wrong.

The Liberated Territories wrote:I wouldn't say that 1984 is targeting anything specific other than authoritarianism.

It's very clearly about the Soviet Union although it has critiques that could apply to any totalitarian state like Nazi Germany, Maoist China etc.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

Joohan wrote:
That's like, at least, 3 people right there.

Only one I can think of is Therm, but he's more the lovechild of a threesome between radical centrism, social democracy and moderate authoritarianism.

*Foursome: hehe's very islamophobic as well.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
..."Theybies"?

Last time I checked, the "ba-" in "baby" does not imply sex nor gender, it is a part of the word, a word that is GENDER-NEUTRAL mind you (you refer to a girl or a boy as a baby, no distinctions needed).

That's part of the reason why it is dumb. It's also pretty dumb in general to pretend like biological sex isn't a thing.

Ye that's very stupid.

The Eternal Aulus wrote:

Sirocca wrote:
Alex Jones has quite a lot of bullshit. Are you saying a lot of people here actually listen to him?
Are you just trying to yank me?

The line between sarcasm and actual opinion is very thin in here.

Akhi you're back!!!!!!! Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatuhu!

El-Amin Caliphate wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
Only one I can think of is Therm, but he's more the lovechild of a threesome between radical centrism, social democracy and moderate authoritarianism.

*Foursome: hehe's very islamophobic as well.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:That's part of the reason why it is dumb. It's also pretty dumb in general to pretend like biological sex isn't a thing.

Ye that's very stupid.

The Eternal Aulus wrote:The line between sarcasm and actual opinion is very thin in here.

Akhi you're back!!!!!!! Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatuhu!

I mean, I can sympathize with Therm hilariously enough.

I strongly disagree with many of Islam's beliefs, but harming its followers by marginalizing them is not the way to chop the tree down.

Calling your baby "they" is not necessarily denying biology. It is probably more like the parents signalling that they don't know if their baby will grow up to be cis or trans, and so they think are being woke and inclusive by acknowledging that. However the odds of a child growing up to be trans are so small and there are no signs they are until much later in life that it's pointless. Infants have no concept of gender.

Maybe these are the kind of parents who believe in a very radical constructionist view of gender like "my two-year old son likes pink, so she's a trans girl now. If he stops liking pink and starts liking army men, s/he is now a boy." In the trans thread they have discussed how they don't agree with or like this idea that all gender is LARPing.

El-Amin Caliphate wrote:Akhi you're back!!!!!!! Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatuhu!

Waleykumsalaam warahmatullah wabarakatuh

The Eternal Aulus wrote:

El-Amin Caliphate wrote:Akhi you're back!!!!!!! Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatuhu!

Waleykumsalaam warahmatullah wabarakatuh

...Engrish por vous plait?

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

The Eternal Aulus wrote:Waleykumsalaam warahmatullah wabarakatuh

...Engrish por vous plait?

It's an Islamic greeting. It literally means ''may peace and the blessings of God be on you as well''.

The Eternal Aulus wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
...Engrish por vous plait?

It's an Islamic greeting. It literally means ''may peace and the blessings of God be on you as well''.

Is it really necessary to pronounce it in Arabic, though?

I wasn't throwing around Latin words when I was still a Catholic...

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

The Eternal Aulus wrote:It's an Islamic greeting. It literally means ''may peace and the blessings of God be on you as well''.

Is it really necessary to pronounce it in Arabic, though?

I wasn't throwing around Latin words when I was still a Catholic...

Arabic is the lingua franca of Muslims, so yeah.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

The Eternal Aulus wrote:It's an Islamic greeting. It literally means ''may peace and the blessings of God be on you as well''.

Is it really necessary to pronounce it in Arabic, though?

I wasn't throwing around Latin words when I was still a Catholic...

Well we use Islamic/Arabic phrases in certain instances. Like for greetings we'd say them in Arabic (giving the salaam in Arabic sounds better than saying it in English to me anyways) and when explaining Islamic concepts we usually say them in Arabic (ex: "tawheed" instead of "oneness of Allah", "sawm" instead of "fasting", etc.)

The Eternal Aulus wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
Is it really necessary to pronounce it in Arabic, though?

I wasn't throwing around Latin words when I was still a Catholic...

Arabic is the lingua franca of Muslims, so yeah.

Again, I consider it to be an unnecessary aspect of Islam (i.e. everything has to be Arabic somehow).

Like I said, Catholics don't go around speaking Latin, they speak in their native tongue (and that includes the religious texts, which have been translated into God knows how many languages).

I'd say the main reason why Catholics don't use Latin as much as Muslims use Arabic (I could be generalizing here, pls no hurt me >m<) is because Christianity moved one from native language roots, and even moved on from Latin (in Cathilicism's case).

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

The Eternal Aulus wrote:Arabic is the lingua franca of Muslims, so yeah.

Again, I consider it to be an unnecessary aspect of Islam (i.e. everything has to be Arabic somehow).

Like I said, Catholics don't go around speaking Latin, they speak in their native tongue (and that includes the religious texts, which have been translated into God knows how many languages).

Because sometimes the essence of words become lost in translation. This is especially the case in most Semitic languages which have words and/or wordplay which may loose its meaning when translated. I think staying close to the ''source language'', or original language as you will, is very important especially for religions. It's also why Arabic is considered a subject of theology in the classical Islamic educational curriculum.

That's why the Roman Catholic Church kept its mass in Latin until the Second Vatican Council. And they still do in Tridentine mass.

This also why some Muslims want to attain the title of HaafiDH (memorizing the whole Qur'an)