Moderation Questions
Moderation Questions
8
zs

Moderation Questions

The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa

30 January 2024 at 05:27 AM
Reply...

24458 Replies

8
zs


by Gorgonian m

There's a difference between an antivaxer and an unvaccinated person.

Correct.

Antivaxers are indeed really, really stupid.

Some are and some aren't.

Not all unvaccinated people are.

True.

For my own safety here, I have no idea the point of that post and I'm not reading the whole thread to try to figure it out. Last time I did this I got yelled at for gaslighting. Just trying to clear up a common confusion.

I'm glad you cleared up that confusion. That said, I was not confused.

While I am typically very suspicious of practically anything produced by the Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex, I did receive a COVID vaccination in 2021.


by Gorgonian m

There's a difference between an antivaxer and an unvaccinated person.

Antivaxers are indeed really, really stupid. Not all unvaccinated people are.

For my own safety here, I have no idea the point of that post and I'm not reading the whole thread to try to figure it out. Last time I did this I got yelled at for gaslighting. Just trying to clear up a common confusion.

From the NIH:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...

An excerpt:

In January 2021, 60% of Black respondents were hesitant about receiving the vaccine compared to 30% of White respondents. In May 2021, hesitancy among Black respondents was approximately 40%, marking approximately 20% difference with White respondents. As such, the level of vaccine acceptance among Black individuals improved dramatically over time, more than for any other race.


by ecriture d'adulte m

What you're saying is more of a return to 1st and 2nd century christianity. I think gospel writers probably had this view and the infamous "Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom" quote in Matthew seems to it. People argue Jesus actually must have said this because it already was getting close to

by craig1120 m

He said that, but to understand what he meant by it, you need to imagine him saying it to one person.

by zers m

That's how I interpret it: individual revelations that come via visions, dreams, etc.

That's obviously what it means now and what it meant in the 2nd century after christianity was well established as a hellenistic religion based on Jesus dying and being seem post crucifixion by his followers. But "Son of Man" in English or Greek does not mean anything apart from Jesus saying it. In Aramaic and Hebrew it (bar adam/ben Adam) was an existing phrase that meant something like mankind. To people in the audience and the very first christians who spoke aramic and hebrew the phrase is probably closer to "some who are standing here will not taste death before they see mankind coming in his Kingdom. Which is problematic and what I was alluding to when I said debate over Son of Man.


by Crossnerd m

Can you elaborate on that?

Not really much to elaborate on. Judging the whole by the part is something we probably shouldn’t do as much as possible, and flipping it to be “social justice” based prejudice doesn’t make it any better. Now you’re just fighting their game with their logic, but telling them that their logic doesn’t work.

By the way, if you look at the crime statistics of trans women, you’ll see that there’s a similar disproportionate level of violence…

But ok please tell me why it’s ok to judge all men based off the actions of the violent minority but not ok to do it in all these other cases that right-wingers want to apply that standard to.


by checkraisdraw m

Not really much to elaborate on. Judging the whole by the part is something we probably shouldn’t do as much as possible, and flipping it to be “social justice” based prejudice doesn’t make it any better. Now you’re just fighting their game with their logic, but telling them that their logic doesn’t work.

Citation please?

Thanks.

I would think data for such a tiny group wouldn't necessarily be sufficiently large to confidently make general claims about such a group.


by geezerchess m

Citation please?

Thanks.

I would think data for such a tiny group wouldn't necessarily be sufficiently large to confidently make general claims about such a group.

MtF transitioners were over 6 times more likely to be convicted of an offence than female comparators and 18 times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence. The group had no statistically significant differences from other natal males, for convictions in general or for violent offending.

Evidence from a Swedish study cited in the proceedings of a UK Parliamentary committee.

https://committees.parliament.uk/written...

Evidence to the same committee regarding UK stats as of 2019:--

MOJ stats show 76 of the 129 male-born prisoners identifying as transgender (not counting any with GRCs) have at least 1 conviction of sexual offence. This includes
36 convictions for rape and 10 for attempted rape. These are clearly male type crimes (rape is defined as penetration with a penis). Here is the number compared with figures for sex offending rates in men and women over the same period.

Comparisons of official MOJ statistics from March / April 2019 (most recent official count of transgender prisoners):
76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9%
125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3%
13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison = 16.8%


I did not anticipate anyway going full racism/transphobia over some light trolling, but it’s good to know who is who 😀


So you are telling me that in a sexual dimorphic species; the sex with 10-15 high times testosterone is more aggressive and violent than the other sex, independent of gender orientation. Color me shocked that humans roughly follow the same biological rules as every other species of mammal.


by geezerchess m

From the NIH:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...An excerpt:

about time gorg got called out for overt racism


by Crossnerd m

I did not anticipate anyway going full racism/transphobia

Why would you not anticipate that happening here?


by geezerchess m

Citation please?

Thanks.

I would think data for such a tiny group wouldn't necessarily be sufficiently large to confidently make general claims about such a group.

vast majority of murdered trans are sex workers - the "trans people are in danger" is largely propped up by a large percentage of them taking up a dangerous occupation and of course some truly horrific outliers of hate

sex workers are 60-100 times more likely to be murdered than the general population


by checkraisdraw m

Not really much to elaborate on. Judging the whole by the part is something we probably shouldn’t do as much as possible, and flipping it to be “social justice” based prejudice doesn’t make it any better. Now you’re just fighting their game with their logic, but telling them that their logic doesn’t work.By the way, if you look at the crime s

by Crossnerd m

I did not anticipate anyway going full racism/transphobia over some light trolling, but it’s good to know who is who 😀

Where is the racism or transphobia? You are such a sophist, just like most pop feminists. Please point out what is racist or transphobic about saying we shouldn’t judge whole groups of people by the actions of a minority of individuals?

The point is the exact opposite of what you are trying to underhandedly imply it is. Actually I am talking about why the man-hating feminist is just as illogical as the racist or the transphobe.


by Crossnerd m

I did not anticipate anyway going full racism/transphobia over some light trolling, but it’s good to know who is who 😀

But sometimes I can't tell when you're trolling and when you're being serious. Probably a comprehension issue on my end though, since I'm less familiar with your posting history than most others here.


by 57 On Red m

Evidence from a Swedish study cited in the proceedings of a UK Parliamentary committee.

https://committees.parliament.uk/written...

Evidence to the same committee regarding UK stats as of 2019:--

Thanks for the data!


by geezerchess m

But sometimes I can't tell when you're trolling and when you're being serious. Probably a comprehension issue on my end though, since I'm less familiar with your posting history than most others here.

That’s by design. If you are always semi-ironic then you can gaslight people by saying “oh it was just a joke, why are you so sensitive”

Keep in mind lefties are the most sensitive people on the planet and will get mad if you don’t follow their ever-shifting list of social justice monikers.


by checkraisdraw m

Where is the racism or transphobia? You are such a sophist, just like most pop feminists. Please point out what is racist or transphobic about saying we shouldn’t judge whole groups of people by the actions of a minority of individuals?

The closest thing to a racist post was Gorgo's.

The point is the exact opposite of what you are trying to underhandedly imply it is. Actually I am talking about why the man-hating feminist is just as illogical as the racist or the transphobe.

Sorry, nuance has no place in a Politics Forum.

And I say that knowing full well that I'm as guilty as anybody for sometimes not appreciating nuance.


by geezerchess m

But sometimes I can't tell when you're trolling and when you're being serious. Probably a comprehension issue on my end though, since I'm less familiar with your posting history than most others here.

I mean… I knew what I was doing when I brought up the gorilla thing lol

Sometimes I get bored…


by Crossnerd m

I mean… I knew what I was doing when I brought up the gorilla thing lol

Sometimes I get bored…

😀


by geezerchess m

Some are and some aren't.

This is wrong. Anyone that is against vaccines in general is really, really stupid. People that think they know better than doctors and medical experts on medical topics are really, really stupid. This is just a fact.


by Gorgonian m

This is wrong. Anyone that is against vaccines in general is really, really stupid. People that think they know better than doctors and medical experts on medical topics are really, really stupid. This is just a fact.

Since you believe that "anyone that is against vaccines in general is really, really stupid" is a fact, I'm sure you can easily prove the claim. Please do so. Thanks.


by geezerchess m

Since you believe that "anyone that is against vaccines in general is really, really stupid" is a fact, I'm sure you can easily prove the claim. Please do so. Thanks.

I did in the very next sentence. Thinking you know more than an expert in a particular field requires one to be incredibly stupid. The only way to be against vaccines is to think you know more than medical experts. Therefore, People that are against vaccines must be incredibly stupid.

Hope that helped.

edit to add: conceivably, I should amend it slightly to say that I'm only talking about honest antivaxers, not lying grifters who know better but are pretending in order to sell products or have other ulterior motives.


by checkraisdraw m

Not really much to elaborate on. Judging the whole by the part is something we probably shouldn’t do as much as possible, and flipping it to be “social justice” based prejudice doesn’t make it any better. Now you’re just fighting their game with their logic, but telling them that their logic doesn’t work.By the way, if you look at the crime statistics of trans women, you’ll see

All the drugs and chemicals these people are taking have to have a negative effect. The human body is not meant to go through this. These people are mentally mixed up to start with. Throw in the looks they get every day and it's easy to see why they act out. There is no way to know what it is going to be like to be in the body of another sex. There has to be a high level of regret in some.

I used to work at a hotel that was across from a hospital for trans. They used to stay at our place. I never met one who was happy. Many were very rude and mean.


I'd say 20 dudes is close to what it would take to win a fight with a gorilla. They would all have to be alphas. I think it would take 75 effeminate males to win. Suffice it to say I think a gorilla would destroy this forum.

I don't know who came up with the 100 number but that's dumb.


by Gorgonian m

I did in the very next sentence. Thinking you know more than an expert in a particular field requires one to be incredibly stupid. The only way to be against vaccines is to think you know more than medical experts. Therefore, People that are against vaccines must be incredibly stupid.Hope that helped.edit to add: conceivably, I should amend it slightly to say that I'm only talk

Medical "experts" disagree on stuff all the time. Certainly those "experts" who earn their lavish lifestyles by way of the Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex are likely to be pro-vaccination. "Ulterior Motive" is a two-way street.

In many cases anti-vaxxers are ignorant,, but not necessarily stupid.

Since survey after survey show that African-Americans are more likely than White folks to be suspicious of vaccinations, why do you think African-Americans are more stupid than White folks?

(It goes without saying that I don't believe African-Americans are more stupid than White folks.)


Your average man in 2025 needs a serotonin inhibitor from a cranky internet post just to get out of bed. Your men would be shitting themselves in panic before they ever have to deal with a gorilla uppercut.

Reply...