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.
I'm talking about religion. 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.
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.
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both. Again the difference is we can actually study those things, we can't study god in the same sense.
Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were saying:
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).
So 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. As a psychological ans sociological construct god is real - and I might join the first religion than will come down with such definition of god. But that is far from what religions claim to be.
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied.
But that does not make it true. 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.
The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness,
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.
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).
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.
That's why I summarized and asked if that's the case. The hypothesis from the person I replied to, seemed to be that it's due to people believing there is some moral obligation in consumer choice and it extending to apple making questionable, consumer unfriednly decision, therefore they can be mad and rude towards people buying apple products. I can get it.
call the people in the phone first and tell them bombs are coming?
We do live in a dystopian world after all: "We are pleased to inform you that your house has been selected for a bombing due to acute terrorist threat. Please leave the area immediately. We are thankful for your cooperation." Only missing Judge Dredd.
A county based on abrahamic religion should know that
Dude, have you seen all the shit countries based on abrahamic religions have done through out the history?
ike saying anybody who disagrees with them supports Hamas.
And the other side says that anyone disagreeing with them is a genocidal nazi. I would say the whole discussion at this point is rather heated and fucked up.
Saying God isn’t real is kinda like saying santa claus isn’t real, and to those kids that desperately needs a santa, Santa is real to them, and that’s all that matters…
So, what you are saying is - we should treat religious people like children? Not sure, that is what you intended - but for sure an interesting example to chose, to make your point. Also at no point did I argue for people not be able to practice their religion, in fact I have no problems with peoples personal spirituality as long as it does not negatively effect people around them.
“people tent to create moral norms for others” As long as those norms are not forcefully applied, it’s fine.
But the forceful part is kind of what organized religion tends to be all about. Religious majorities tend to demand conformism even from people not following their religion.
“based on the particular fantasy story they happen to believe in.” I would hope you were more self aware because not too long ago lgbtq’s were dismissed as “fantasy” or some kind of medical diagnose. Just please be more considerate before throwing those types of accusations around.
Except LGBTQ people are real, you can go outside and talk to them, they will talk back at you. If god is talking back at you, I have bad news for you my friend. What are we even talking about?
and the 5 or so companies remaining would compete based on their own original content
I don't see how this is any better, since if you want a specific show produced by a specific company you would still need to subscribe to their service, kind of the same problem we having right now.
Again, I'm not arguing for monopolies in general. But with media it's what customers want - a single service they can access all the media they want, with reasonable prices or a subscription model.
Musik industry has an extra layer of rights management companies that deal with exactly that issue. So I agree, we could create a legal framework or even an industry self regulating system to work that problem out. But I kind of said that already:
We would need a global overhaul of copyright to work this one out.
Telling people that your make believe fantasy story is true, is fundamental different from acknowledging existence or expression of non heterosexual sex and non heteronormative gender expression/identity. Especially since people tent to create moral norms for others, based on the particular fantasy story they happen to believe in.
Most times. But for media, people want to have all their media in one place for a cheap price - so far only monopolistic or oligopolistic services were able to provide that. It worked quite well for games and in some form for music (you will often have single right management companies in the music industry - like BMI in USA or GEMA in Germany). But in general, I would agree that monopolies (outside natural monopolies and those should be run by the state) are unfavorable for the customer.
I'v been using mac books over a decade so not sure when I need to come back here. I was unhappy with the usbc only mac book pro and considered switching but the m1 fixed issues i had, so I'm here again. Just imagine that there are people out there who don't care to much about repair-ability.
I'm talking about religion. 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.
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both. Again the difference is we can actually study those things, we can't study god in the same sense.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were saying:
So 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. As a psychological ans sociological construct god is real - and I might join the first religion than will come down with such definition of god. But that is far from what religions claim to be.