Holy shit, relax. Sperging out on/. isn't going to change the minds of the vast majority of Windows users. You're acting like this is the most important issue that you are facing when it literally shouldn't affect you in the slightest.
I do actually, and someone still has the choice to identify as any gender they please whether you like it or not. It is a fact that they can decide their gender identity just like it is a fact that you can choose to be frightened of the trannys gettin' rights n' junk.
The "facts" are that they have a choice in their gender identity and to not respect that in any conversation not pertinent to her sex is bigotry. You could say that a trans person was previously a man, or that they have a y chromosome making them technically male, but still, unless you are discussing medical or biological differences there is no reason to double down on something so pointless. She is a man legally to the same extent as someone's name is legally changed after a legal name change. What is the point of refusing to acknowledge one of these when (I assume) you wouldn't contest the other?
That makes sense. The way this is worded made it seem like it was a humanitarian effort due to the environmental impact of nuclear but I guess that's just spin. Depressing though that so many places still rely heavily on coal while France is tearing down nuclear plants to save money.
"During the parliamentary debate, some opposition lawmakers criticized the legislation. They said it would be unrealistic to close more than 20 of 58 reactors now in operation in the next 10 years."
Doesn't this imply that they are anticipating that nuclear will in fact shrink?
Nuclear power is one of the most efficient sources of energy that we use, what is the reason for lowering the dependency on it if the plants are properly maintained? What kind of alternative energy source are they planning on relying on? These are legitimate questions, I'm sincerely confused about this.
It's not clear to me whether the PBs of her "white dude" friend were regarding the same action as hers. All I saw in the series of tweets (terrible medium to relay any kind of information, btw) was "Meanwhile, one of the other people involved, a white dude (good friend I won't name, he can name himself if he wants), was also getting PBs." It very vaguely implies that he was getting PBs for his involvement in this, but it doesn't actually state it, and it also uses the plural "PBs" which, if they are all regarding the salary discussion, is against policy. I'm not really sure what to think of this and it just seems like an airing of dirty laundry to generate outrage. Personally, I'd like to see her take it up with a lawyer and see if she actually has a discrimination case rather than this one-sided interpretation of the events that transpired apparently meant to fuel the fire that is the sexism and racism debate that is out of control in the tech industry right now.
Who cares how this is used? You can use an image hosting site to take a picture of yourself with your username much more easily and be vetted by administrators if they're so racist or sexist that they care about being "pure". I can't possibly imagine that a racist or sexist forum would be so swamped with new users that it would be worth it to automate the process at the cost of turning anyone away.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, what an insightful comment, I can't imagine why you would post this as AC.
Holy shit, relax. Sperging out on /. isn't going to change the minds of the vast majority of Windows users. You're acting like this is the most important issue that you are facing when it literally shouldn't affect you in the slightest.
And you are conflating all theists with creationists. This is pretty much boilerplate for creationists.
I do actually, and someone still has the choice to identify as any gender they please whether you like it or not. It is a fact that they can decide their gender identity just like it is a fact that you can choose to be frightened of the trannys gettin' rights n' junk.
The "facts" are that they have a choice in their gender identity and to not respect that in any conversation not pertinent to her sex is bigotry. You could say that a trans person was previously a man, or that they have a y chromosome making them technically male, but still, unless you are discussing medical or biological differences there is no reason to double down on something so pointless. She is a man legally to the same extent as someone's name is legally changed after a legal name change. What is the point of refusing to acknowledge one of these when (I assume) you wouldn't contest the other?
That makes sense. The way this is worded made it seem like it was a humanitarian effort due to the environmental impact of nuclear but I guess that's just spin. Depressing though that so many places still rely heavily on coal while France is tearing down nuclear plants to save money.
What about the quote from TFA:
"During the parliamentary debate, some opposition lawmakers criticized the legislation. They said it would be unrealistic to close more than 20 of 58 reactors now in operation in the next 10 years."
Doesn't this imply that they are anticipating that nuclear will in fact shrink?
Nuclear power is one of the most efficient sources of energy that we use, what is the reason for lowering the dependency on it if the plants are properly maintained? What kind of alternative energy source are they planning on relying on? These are legitimate questions, I'm sincerely confused about this.
It's not clear to me whether the PBs of her "white dude" friend were regarding the same action as hers. All I saw in the series of tweets (terrible medium to relay any kind of information, btw) was "Meanwhile, one of the other people involved, a white dude (good friend I won't name, he can name himself if he wants), was also getting PBs." It very vaguely implies that he was getting PBs for his involvement in this, but it doesn't actually state it, and it also uses the plural "PBs" which, if they are all regarding the salary discussion, is against policy. I'm not really sure what to think of this and it just seems like an airing of dirty laundry to generate outrage. Personally, I'd like to see her take it up with a lawyer and see if she actually has a discrimination case rather than this one-sided interpretation of the events that transpired apparently meant to fuel the fire that is the sexism and racism debate that is out of control in the tech industry right now.
What do you lose by using someone's preferred pronouns? I don't like her either, but being petty and immature about pronouns makes you look stupid.
Who cares how this is used? You can use an image hosting site to take a picture of yourself with your username much more easily and be vetted by administrators if they're so racist or sexist that they care about being "pure". I can't possibly imagine that a racist or sexist forum would be so swamped with new users that it would be worth it to automate the process at the cost of turning anyone away.