zapatos

No

I feel like I am debating with a child. If you don't want to take this seriously I have better things to do.

But then he specifically said he would respect the choice of the person to whom the pronoun would be applied. So again, what did he do that was hypocritical?

iNow did not refer to you as 'they'. He gave an example of how to use 'they' in a sentence for MigL.

As long as you are available koti, can you please answer my question to you? I'm just really curious. Don't mean to rush you.

What exactly was hypocritical?

Serious question. Who are these people you are referring to? And what I'm asking for is their names or other identifying information.

We all accept you have a strong desire to be a biological mother. This place is much more accepting of who you are biologically than most places you'll venture into. What we are telling you is that your educational background and your approach of teaching yourself will never lead to your goal of having a child. Perhaps you should instead focus your energies on finding scientists who are already doing the type of research you are interested in and ask them if they can help you. If I want a special type of aircraft that has never been created before I don't try to build it myself, I talk to people who specialize in aircraft research and design.

I think we can all agree on that point. You are in over your head and should move on to some other endeavor.

In what way?

That sounds to me a bit more like an honest mistake than any political correctness issue. In any case I agree there is no issue when something happens once. If the man had said 'please refer to my spouse as "he" and you continued to call the spouse "she", then that would have been the problem.

Which is what. Exactly. I'm getting rather tired of you telling me how bad I am then ignoring my requests for clarification. It is arguing in bad faith and simply trolling.

Har! Made me laugh out loud! 😆 I agree completely. It's simply a shortcut that leads to a preconceived conclusion.

Citation?

Evident to whom? Does the person you are claiming took things out of context agree with you? It looks to me as if society is having one of their many debates/conversations where we work out the new rules on a topic that had previously been ignored. These conversations tend to go better when we address each concern rather than saying "that is totally unfounded". If someone posts in the science forum about some crazy idea, the response they typically get is to point out flaws in their idea, or to ask pointed questions meant to allow the poster to recognize the flaws of their idea on their own. It is not considered good form to simply say 'we won't discuss your idea as it is evident to me that your idea is totally unfounded'. Sounds similar to how PC people are treated.

When you say "PC Brigade" that sounds like you are referring to a group of people who you believe are making unreasonable requests with respect to things they find objectionable, and that you are not taking them seriously. Did I misinterpret that? Because it certainly doesn't sound like you are grouping them together due to their outstanding work in shedding light on inappropriate language and behavior. Of course. No one is suggesting otherwise. The questions are 'who decides what the limit is', and 'how do you respond if you disagree with them'.

Yeah, that's pretty much the same thing as saying "don't be so sensitive". Completely disregards their thoughts on the matter. I imagine at some point in your life you might have said something like 'women managers are too emotional'. But (I hope) not anymore. And that is because women pushed back against men dismissing them as inferior in their thinking. Many people who have been marginalized all their lives finally feel they can push back against the slights they experience every day because of their ethnicity, religion, culture, etc. And you dismiss them as being part of the PC Brigade, or others say they are too sensitive. Mostly people don't say "women are too emotional at work" anymore but instead limit their comments on emotional instability to concrete example. Generalizations are no longer appropriate. I'm hopeful that in the near future people will quit dismissing those who feel a sign, or song, or Tomahawk Chop is something that makes them feel bad, and has the temerity to ask others to stop. Maybe then those who speak up against slights against them won't be pigeon-holed like blacks, women and other minorities were, until they finally said "ENOUGH". Using an example of an obvious overreach by someone objecting to a song as a reason to say "people are too sensitive" or "you are part of the PC brigade", is no more appropriate than using an example of a black man being lazy to say "blacks are lazy". Unless you understand the details of why a person is objecting to something, it is not fair to summarily dismiss their objection.

Haha. I pictured swans with a nasty THC habit.

And with a snap of the fingers you have managed to summarily dismiss the feelings and pain of millions by telling them they have yet another weakness that isn't even worthy of your consideration. Everyone's feelings are genuine to them whether you care to address them or not. Please try to see things from their perspective.

The carbon that went into manufacturing my third vehicle is a sunk cost, so to speak. I did not go to the dealer and buy three new cars. Rather than trade in my ten-year-old minivan when it was time to buy a new car I converted it to use for hauling hay, compost, lumber and other items.

My goodness you are rude. Can you please explain to me how people are wasting 'double+' amount of fuel if they own more cars than there are people in their household? You are exaggerating the extent of the problem San Marino has 1,263 cars per 10,000 people. But so what? Is their situation the same as that of France? Yes, because all US citizens live in New York City or Chicago apartment buildings and have ready access to mass transit. Do you know by what circumstances I came to own three vehicles? Do you know what my third vehicle is used for; whether its function can be met by the other two vehicles? Yes, my wife and I really should use the mass transit that is so readily available in rural America. No, it mostly sits by the barn except when needed. Look, you made a factually incorrect statement in your zeal to condemn others. I simply corrected it. I do not appreciate your 'holier than thou' attitude and using me as your foil while you go on a rant about how worthless we Americans are. If you must paint with such a broad brush please use someone else for your target.

I'm curious what kind of article you'll write when you only asked for "yes/no/it's complicated" type of responses.

My wife and I have three vehicles between us. We would be hard pressed to use the same amount of fuel in the third vehicle as we use in the first two, as we can only drive one car per person at a time. About the only waste of extra resources is the money we have to spend on insurance for the third vehicle.

It is not so much that people won't recycle plastics, but that most plastics are not recycled whether we put it in the recycle bin or not. Laying the responsibility on consumers simply lets the manufacturers crank out all the plastic they want. https://www.livescience.com/how-much-plastic-recycling.html https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/897692090/how-big-oil-misled-the-public-into-believing-plastic-would-be-recycled

You can interpret what I said that way, but it requires you to ignore the first part of the sentence I wrote. You cannot be a consumer and reasonably avoid plastics or a carbon footprint. If manufacturers are responsible for reducing the use of plastics and recycling the plastics it will have a much larger impact than if you lay the responsibility on people. In California a law was just signed that will outlaw the sale of gasoline engines in products such as lawn mowers, chain saws, trimmers, etc. You can ask people all you want to reduce their use of gasoline engines, but it will not nearly have the impact of simply enforcing a ban on their sale.