SaltSong

joined 4 months ago
[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 5 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

No European law applies outside Europe. That's kind of the nature of laws.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I suspect that the reaction to the edited video spooked them. They were expecting to get away with that, and when it was so easily called pot as a fraud, they had to reconsider.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Back when I lived in N. Carolina, there was a local brand called "Dr. Enuff." Loved that stuff.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

On earth? No, not by a long shot. We would need to get into the deconstructing planets business.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 4 points 2 weeks ago

I was thinking this myself.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago

I love me some Stratigo.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Also, that whole thing is nonsense of the highest order.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 1 points 1 month ago

Because we don't want them doing surge pricing.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is there some reason we want brands to join the conversation?

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago

Some of this makes a bit of sense, but it still leans heavily on perception by others, rather than respecting what people know about themselves. This does not seem to be what many transgender persons want.

I'll think about it.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago

using ciswomen and transwomen makes you sound like a TERF.

What would be a correct way to distinguish between the two?

  • "Woman" seems like it works refer to both, to be used in the majority of cases when the distinction is irrelevant.

  • I don't want to say "natural" women, or "real" women, as even someone as thick as me can see that's insulting.

  • It seems that using the prefix for both makes them equal.

What do you think world be more appropriate?

it’s impossible for Black people to not pass as Black because it’s been proven they experience racism based on an immutable characteristic.

But they would suggest that as soon as we discover a way to change that characteristic, transrace world be valid.

Further, while gender identity may not be based on appearance, the way one is treated is very much based on appearance. If I look male, I get treated as male. If I look female, I get treated as female. If I look like one, but insist I am the other, people tend to have disagreements between their deliberate and automatic behaviors. (Well, the same people do, anyway.)

I can't think of a good way to prove it, but I am legitimately curious about this topic. I'm never happy with the answer "because this one is right, and that one is wrong." There needs to be reasons why.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

maybe stop comparing race and gender then.

Isn't the entire premise of the post that someone is seeing parallels here, and would like to understand why the similarities are not meaningful? As I said, I agree that transracial people are being silly, but I haven't seen an argument here that can't be used against transgender people.

trans women only pass because we’re women.

But there are plenty of transwomen who don't "pass" despite being women. But they should still be treated as women. Hell, there have been at least a few reports of ciswomen who couldn't pass as women, at least to sufficiently assholish observers. On that basis, I don't think we can use "passing" as a factor to determine people's identity.

view more: next ›