SpawnMasons - vc-text

Jō

Not in joe brain

✅

✅

I just had a seziure from the amount of emojis lmao

Jō

Not in joe brain

✅

can u explain why? do you disagree that it's because of societal pressure/conditioning/understanding that you would do that downgrading?

Brother leijurv

can u explain why? do you disagree that it's because of societal pressure/conditioning/understanding that you would do that downgrading?

No

19:51

Zaanga

ok ? btw im not arguing about whether its transpobia or not, I just dont think its inherently wrong to have my own criteria for whoever I wish to date. In my opinion, it is not wrong to not want to date some on the basis of their transgenderism. If that classifies as being bigoted towards trans people, then ig I am a transpobe lol

im laughing lol, i linked you to motte and bailey, explained how you were doing it, explained how it's a fallacy, and you do PRECISELY that, AGAIN in the IMMEDIATE NEXT MESSAGE YOU SEND

19:52

i laughed irl upon reading that (edited)

Brother leijurv

the motte is "i do not have sexual attraction to certain things, inherently, biologically, in the physical layout of my brain"

^

Brother leijurv

the bailey is "therefore it is acceptable for me to make any arbitrary distinction of what sorts of people I would ever interact with, by any delineation I choose, and I cannot be called a bigot / -phobe for that"

^

19:52

I just dont think its inherently wrong to have my own criteria for whoever I wish to date

Brother leijurv

im laughing lol, i linked you to motte and bailey, explained how you were doing it, explained how it's a fallacy, and you do PRECISELY that, AGAIN in the IMMEDIATE NEXT MESSAGE YOU SEND

i didnt understand your explanation lol

god damn

I legit asked for clarifcation

Zaanga

i didnt understand your explanation lol

look at the two messages "the motte is" and "the bailey is"

Yeah ima be real zaanga leijurv got you good lmao

do you understand how A does not imply B

@Worshipful can you please just change the topic of this channel to Intense debates

its the topic lol

Brother leijurv

look at the two messages "the motte is" and "the bailey is"

link plz

just not about dream cheating

i dont think he read the wikipedia page

19:53

lmfao

Zaanga

I legit asked for clarifcation

i linked you to the wikipedia article

LMFAO

Zaanga

link plz

19:53

bruh i legit replied to them with ^

lmfao

>not reading the wiki article

I did not see them lol

19:54

ill go read the page brb

Brother leijurv

the motte is "i do not have sexual attraction to certain things, inherently, biologically, in the physical layout of my brain"

this ^ is true, factual, and easily defensible

19:54

for example, that's why it's "not sexist to be a homosexual"

Brother leijurv

for example, that's why it's "not sexist to be a homosexual"

even though it is "discriminating against women"

Brother leijurv

the bailey is "therefore it is acceptable for me to make any arbitrary distinction of what sorts of people I would ever interact with, by any delineation I choose, and I cannot be called a bigot / -phobe for that"

this is literally just not true

19:54

you can declare it to be true, say you think it's true, but it doesn't magically make it true

@Brother leijurv what's the deepest message chain you've been a part of in a Talk: page? (edited)

Zaanga

ok ? btw im not arguing about whether its transpobia or not, I just dont think its inherently wrong to have my own criteria for whoever I wish to date. In my opinion, it is not wrong to not want to date some on the basis of their transgenderism. If that classifies as being bigoted towards trans people, then ig I am a transpobe lol

I just dont think its inherently wrong to have my own criteria

yeah it isn't "inherently wrong" to have criteria, but it can be wrong, depending on the criteria

¶

@Brother leijurv what's the deepest message chain you've been a part of in a Talk: page? (edited)

so far that we've had to use {{outdent

19:55

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Human#Argument_made_in_the_FAQ

19:55

scroll through it

Brother leijurv

I just dont think its inherently wrong to have my own criteria

yeah it isn't "inherently wrong" to have criteria, but it can be wrong, depending on the criteria

if the criteria is "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is black because that is correlated with GANG LIFESTYLE and DRUGS and CRIME" then hell fucking yeah you're being racist and that's wrong (edited)

Wtf now pets

19:57

Brother leijurv

if the criteria is "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is black because that is correlated with GANG LIFESTYLE and DRUGS and CRIME" then hell fucking yeah you're being racist and that's wrong (edited)

precisely the same as "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is trans, not because of any physical incompatibility, but rather because it's correlated with being a degenerate, being mentally ill, etc"

@Brother leijurv okay so I read the wikipedia article on it, so since I am just learning about this fallacy, what did I say was my "motte" and which was my "bailey" ?

kek

19:59

thats a lot of scrolling to do lol

20:00

lemme try to find it

its literally 7 minutes ago

20:00

also theres always this ^

I AM THE BAILEY MY SHIT PISS SND CUM ARE THE MOAT

Nice pets

okay, so my motte was that I have ceartin biological attractions, and my bailey is that I can make arbitrary decisions on who I would want to date and cannot be called a bigot/phobe for it. correct ? (edited)

Zaanga

okay, so my motte was that I have ceartin biological attractions, and my bailey is that I can make arbitrary decisions on who I would want to date and cannot be called a bigot/phobe for it. correct ? (edited)

yes

20:06

those two ideas are not the same

20:06

and one does not imply the other

Brother leijurv

if the criteria is "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is black because that is correlated with GANG LIFESTYLE and DRUGS and CRIME" then hell fucking yeah you're being racist and that's wrong (edited)

here's a simple example

Brother leijurv

precisely the same as "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is trans, not because of any physical incompatibility, but rather because it's correlated with being a degenerate, being mentally ill, etc"

and then an analogy to this situation

I mean so if my bailey is that I can make arbitrary decisions on who to date and you cannot call my a transphobe or bigot, I did not argue that. I just think its Not wrong to do so. If that thought process classifies as being a transphobe, then ok, thats fine. I think we are arguing 2 separate things lol.

ah whatever that isn't a useful distinction

20:10

let me rephrase

20:10

you see, it was my moral compass talking there, where I just assumed that we would agree that being bigoted was wrong

20:11

the bailey is "therefore it is acceptable for me to make any arbitrary distinction of what sorts of people I would ever interact with, by any delineation I choose, and I cannot be called ~~a bigot / -phobe~~ morally wrong for that" (edited)

Brother leijurv

if the criteria is "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is black because that is correlated with GANG LIFESTYLE and DRUGS and CRIME" then hell fucking yeah you're being racist and that's wrong (edited)

would you agree that it's racist and morally wrong to say and do something like this?

fruit loop

20:13

lmao suck penis or you are literally a bigot lol

Brother Todarac

lmao suck penis or you are literally a bigot lol

no one says this

20:14

*unironically

no one?

ohhHHHOOohOHHhhhho MOMYmYOYMmmomymoym GOGGOGOODODo

well todarac did just say it

no one who "represents the movement" says it

lmfao

Brother Todarac

lmao suck penis or you are literally a bigot lol

u have to admit that this phrase is said more often by right wingers to mock the sjw community than actually said by wokes

bro I am going to send you so many loud twitter users

20:15

you are going to be so embarassed

why would i be embarassed

fOR HOW wRONG you are

Brother leijurv

would you agree that it's racist and morally wrong to say and do something like this?

quick spot-morals-check @Brother Todarac agree or disagree

i warn you if you do not pass the morals check

wait let me read it

i will spank you

20:16

in minecraft

20:16

by sneaking next to your character while holding a lead (aka a whip)

Brother leijurv

if the criteria is "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is black because that is correlated with GANG LIFESTYLE and DRUGS and CRIME" then hell fucking yeah you're being racist and that's wrong (edited)

just this message, is that a morally wrong thing to do/say?

20:17

(in other words, is it wrong to be racist?)

In the exact way you worded it, yes its racist and morally wrong because youre talking about a group, but it would be valid to claim it about a single person, the same way you could claim a white person is involved with drugs and crime

yeah, if you have knowledge that an individual person is involved with that lifestyle, sure

i think you phrased that a little awkwardly but i think we agree

judge by quality of character

20:18

anti prejudice etc

saying it as a general statement (like, i would never be with ANY black person, because of their increased likelihood to MAYBE be involved in this) is wrong, agree?

post the video todysnack

Brother leijurv

saying it as a general statement (like, i would never be with ANY black person, because of their increased likelihood to MAYBE be involved in this) is wrong, agree?

this is spicy territory

20:19

Its generally wrong, but its also a fact that they are statistically more likely

Brother Todarac

this is spicy territory

wait then what were you calling "racist and morally wrong" a second ago, if not that

Brother Todarac

Its generally wrong, but its also a fact that they are statistically more likely

that's correct, you can make a stastically-likely statement that is still morally wrong

Brother leijurv

that's correct, you can make a stastically-likely statement that is still morally wrong

rationalists HATE this concept

Its wrong because you should judge on an individual level (from a few messages back), but as a group, you can start the statstics

20:20

but you shouldnt use the statistics to judge the individual

Brother Todarac

Its wrong because you should judge on an individual level (from a few messages back), but as a group, you can start the statstics

yes, i agree!

Brother Todarac

but you shouldnt use the statistics to judge the individual

yes that is the key point

20:20

using the statistics to judge the individual is what racism is (when talking on a direct interpersonal level) (edited)

20:20

and that is wrong (edited)

20:20

now todarac, i will make an analogy sunglasses_cat

20:20

prepare yourself

to be unproblematic in your dating preferences, does it require that you scientifically establish causality between every trait that affects your attraction and a negative outcome?

Brother leijurv

precisely the same as "i would never ever ever want to be with someone who is trans, not because of any physical incompatibility, but rather because it's correlated with being a degenerate, being mentally ill, etc"

^

¶

to be unproblematic in your dating preferences, does it require that you scientifically establish causality between every trait that affects your attraction and a negative outcome?

no, quite the opposite

20:21

doing that IS problematic

I said causation not correlation (edited)

as in the example i was using, stating "i have scientifically determined that black people 13/50 so therefore that's why I would never date them"

20:21

IS problematic

20:21

even though you have scientific statistics behind it

¶

I said causation not correlation (edited)

AH

no, but that's not causation

20:21

ya

my bad

Brother leijurv

would you agree that it's racist and morally wrong to say and do something like this?

I would say yes, as its a very sweeping generalization, HOWEVER I know that the come back to this supposed "contradiction" in my logic would be "then why are you doing this to trans people" and that is because the a good majority of black people (at least in America) are NOT involved in the gang/drug/ etc stuff, so the generalization would be false, HOWEVER transgender people 40 to 41% of them have attempted suicide which is a insanely high number, and so the generalization of "I would not want to date a trans person due to their significantly more likely chance of have mental issues" is valid and a real concern. As we can (hopefully) both agree that looking out for your own self interest in dating is Okay to do, I would say that dating a person who has nearly a 50/50 chance of killing themselves would not be looking out for your own self interest. Now obviously not every trans person has a mental illness, BUT how many of them on the first few dates would be willing to tell you about their mental health ? So while sure this can count as bigotry, idc. Its not morally wrong for me to not want to deal with those issues.

oh boy

Just treat peeps how they’ve treated u imho

¶

no, but that's not causation

honestly i'm drawing a blank, can you give an example of a causation where it's something you observe that guaranteed affects something that is "unproblematic" to discriminate along?

20:22

everything i can think of is just "strong correlation"

no, that's kind of my point @Brother leijurv , that is an unreasonable standard

Zaanga

I would say yes, as its a very sweeping generalization, HOWEVER I know that the come back to this supposed "contradiction" in my logic would be "then why are you doing this to trans people" and that is because the a good majority of black people (at least in America) are NOT involved in the gang/drug/ etc stuff, so the generalization would be false, HOWEVER transgender people 40 to 41% of them have attempted suicide which is a insanely high number, and so the generalization of "I would not want to date a trans person due to their significantly more likely chance of have mental issues" is valid and a real concern. As we can (hopefully) both agree that looking out for your own self interest in dating is Okay to do, I would say that dating a person who has nearly a 50/50 chance of killing themselves would not be looking out for your own self interest. Now obviously not every trans person has a mental illness, BUT how many of them on the first few dates would be willing to tell you about their mental health ? So while sure this can count as bigotry, idc. Its not morally wrong for me to not want to deal with those issues.

glad you agree on that one, however, you immediately went back on it to say that it is only morally wrong because the percentage numbers aren't high enough

¶

no, that's kind of my point @Brother leijurv , that is an unreasonable standard

it's okay to let little signals inform your decision, it isn't okay to make sweeping pre-judgement generalizations about a person

20:23

such as: "i would NEVER date a black person" is not okay

20:23

"i would NEVER date a drug dealer", however, is probably fine

I will probably never date either

Brother leijurv

such as: "i would NEVER date a black person" is not okay

even if you have Facts and Logic stating that it's more likely among this community (edited)

Jō

I will probably never date either

iffy

I mean statistically Ive been on this earth 20 years, and dated 4 people - all cock asian

20:25

leijurv be like imma tell you how to date people but i dont even date people amiright boys

20:25

Zaanga

I would say yes, as its a very sweeping generalization, HOWEVER I know that the come back to this supposed "contradiction" in my logic would be "then why are you doing this to trans people" and that is because the a good majority of black people (at least in America) are NOT involved in the gang/drug/ etc stuff, so the generalization would be false, HOWEVER transgender people 40 to 41% of them have attempted suicide which is a insanely high number, and so the generalization of "I would not want to date a trans person due to their significantly more likely chance of have mental issues" is valid and a real concern. As we can (hopefully) both agree that looking out for your own self interest in dating is Okay to do, I would say that dating a person who has nearly a 50/50 chance of killing themselves would not be looking out for your own self interest. Now obviously not every trans person has a mental illness, BUT how many of them on the first few dates would be willing to tell you about their mental health ? So while sure this can count as bigotry, idc. Its not morally wrong for me to not want to deal with those issues.

is valid and a real concern

yeah but what if i told you that the suicide rate for literally just being depressed is actually higher than being trans? (btw the 41% number is self-reported suicidal ideation and it is deboooooooooooooonked for actual attempt rate among the broader community) would you then say "i would never date a chick who was diagnosed with depression"? because i think you would if you had the hots for them lol

Can we PLEASE change 'Caucasian' to 'Cock Asian'?

you underestimate my standards. If I find league of legends on her hard drive, she is dumperino'd

Zaanga

I would say yes, as its a very sweeping generalization, HOWEVER I know that the come back to this supposed "contradiction" in my logic would be "then why are you doing this to trans people" and that is because the a good majority of black people (at least in America) are NOT involved in the gang/drug/ etc stuff, so the generalization would be false, HOWEVER transgender people 40 to 41% of them have attempted suicide which is a insanely high number, and so the generalization of "I would not want to date a trans person due to their significantly more likely chance of have mental issues" is valid and a real concern. As we can (hopefully) both agree that looking out for your own self interest in dating is Okay to do, I would say that dating a person who has nearly a 50/50 chance of killing themselves would not be looking out for your own self interest. Now obviously not every trans person has a mental illness, BUT how many of them on the first few dates would be willing to tell you about their mental health ? So while sure this can count as bigotry, idc. Its not morally wrong for me to not want to deal with those issues.

So while sure this can count as bigotry, idc. Its not morally wrong

disagree. if you're using large group statistics to write off an individual person from getting close with you, that is morally wrong

20:26

additionally i dispute the numbers to begin with

Brother leijurv

is valid and a real concern

yeah but what if i told you that the suicide rate for literally just being depressed is actually higher than being trans? (btw the 41% number is self-reported suicidal ideation and it is deboooooooooooooonked for actual attempt rate among the broader community) would you then say "i would never date a chick who was diagnosed with depression"? because i think you would if you had the hots for them lol

"would you then say "i would never date a chick who was diagnosed with depression"? because i think you would if you had the hots for them lol" are you seriously trying to read my mind on who I would or would not date lol

ufo

leijurv be like imma tell you how to date people but i dont even date people amiright boys

Zaanga

"would you then say "i would never date a chick who was diagnosed with depression"? because i think you would if you had the hots for them lol" are you seriously trying to read my mind on who I would or would not date lol

im mostly joking around with that one