I'm not quite certain the point you are making here. Is the implication that because humans typically have two hands, those that do not are not a group that can be described? Or that they can be, but only should be as the product of developmental errors?
We don't generally, where we know exceptions exist, refuse to acknowledge their existence. Saying sex is a binary is saying there are only males and only females. That's literally what binary means. Like binary notation either uses 0 or 1. If it was possible for sometimes to have a 2, it wouldn't be binary anymore. That's a different thing.
This is especially true for something like sex that is based on a grouping of traits, genes, expressions, etc. which are not universally 0 or 1. Sure, we generally agree on a category when some are different, but there's some points where it's not so stark. Hence, the binary fails because there can be overlap and grey.
Nobody is saying we have to stop using male and female to describe sex in most cases, especially in a medical setting. But if you had a child born intersex, and the doctor turned to you and said, "Nah, my gut says male. Nothing will be different," you'd probably ask for a second opinion.
Never saw any before this year. I don't get how they survive because they are the slowest, dumbest bugs I've ever seen. They just loudly splat onto the ground out of nowhere and flail about while I stomp them into a pulp.
It's only going to get worse as traditional outlets try to compete with the immediacy of random people posting confidently on social media. There is no gentleman's agreement for this situation to wait on confirmation unless you want to become irrelevant.
I admire any outlets that stick to their scruples and wish them the best. Just because information can move fast doesn't always mean it should...
I'm not seeing where I mentioned him being a Nazi.
I understand being charitable and not assuming bad in people. However, it's not exactly a mystery where Trump stands in this area. I'm a little doubtful this comedian is barely making rent, so this wasn't a gig he had to take. Since he did, he has to accept being part of that context. It was very easy to avoid.
If this ends up costing Trump the election, and Hinchcliff comes out saying that was his master plan, I'll gladly eat my words.
It's important to recognize that Trump does not understand hate and love like you or me. His rallies are "full of love" because he views love as loyalty to and adoration of him. Opposition for any reason is hate. He does not see racism as hate because he sees it as truth, and speaking the truth is at worst harsh but necessary.
He honestly is an old version of one of those people who won't shut up about their haters.
If this guy genuinely went to this rally and was trying to make fun of this sort of racism by telling that joke (i.e., the joke is how stupid it is to believe that), then you would have a point. But I don't see any reason to believe that because he agreed to speak at a Trump rally. Context goes both ways.
While it's worse at a political rally, I don't think this is much better at a comedy club. Mostly because it's not really a joke; it's just offensive. Perhaps if there was some point he was trying to make beyond being racist, but it doesn't seem like it. It's only "funny" if you're already bigoted against Puerto Ricans.
And MA has also had Republican governors in recent history, yet both are always among the highest % voting Democratic in presidential/congressional elections with Democratic supermajorities in their state houses.
Governors in New England are often a weird exception and are sometimes linked to poor turnout. That does not mean either state would have more of an appetite for a centrist party. Such a party would probably take more Republican votes than Democratic.
I'm not sure about New England. New Hampshire and Maine such a party would probably work in, but I am doubtful of any of the rest. MA and VT are two of the most left-leaning states in the country.
It's not the economy. If it was, they wouldn't be considering the guy who wants to throw tariffs around willy-nilly. It's one of the other things. You know, those things.
I think, at least in the GoT example, sexual situations can be used to communicate a lot about the attitudes and culture around sex and nudity in the universe of the show or movie. It's much more interesting than somebody saying, "Hey, person who already knows this: it's considered normal for men to use brothels, isn't it?"
It's much less interesting and necessary for something set in the "current" world, since the audience doesn't need as much education in the social mores. However, it can make the work have better instructive longevity if it's an accurate depiction of the time, since people fifty years in the future can watch and understand what was different.
But I do agree that overall there has been a lot of gratuitous nudity and sex, just the same with violence, etc.
No, they absolutely do pledge and affirm that. Not sure what that person is talking about. It's definitely, at least on paper, expected for individuals in the military to refuse to follow unlawful orders. What happens in practice is another story. See: entire history of US military action.
This is really key, though the state level is probably most important. If your voting activism doesn't go beyond the presidential election, it's performative at most. A third party candidate without members of their party is state houses and Congress is going to be fairly ineffective even if they somehow did do the impossible and get elected.
MirthfulAlembic @ MirthfulAlembic @lemmy.world Posts 0Comments 272Joined 2 yr. ago
I'm not quite certain the point you are making here. Is the implication that because humans typically have two hands, those that do not are not a group that can be described? Or that they can be, but only should be as the product of developmental errors?
We don't generally, where we know exceptions exist, refuse to acknowledge their existence. Saying sex is a binary is saying there are only males and only females. That's literally what binary means. Like binary notation either uses 0 or 1. If it was possible for sometimes to have a 2, it wouldn't be binary anymore. That's a different thing.
This is especially true for something like sex that is based on a grouping of traits, genes, expressions, etc. which are not universally 0 or 1. Sure, we generally agree on a category when some are different, but there's some points where it's not so stark. Hence, the binary fails because there can be overlap and grey.
Nobody is saying we have to stop using male and female to describe sex in most cases, especially in a medical setting. But if you had a child born intersex, and the doctor turned to you and said, "Nah, my gut says male. Nothing will be different," you'd probably ask for a second opinion.