mechoman444
So basically everything that you said doesn't address a single thing in my comment.
You're simply Gish galloping at the moment going from one thing to the other.
Is there anything specifically you would like to address about my comment.
Specifically how the mental illness of gender dysphoria debunks the "I identify as" in the trans community in a relation to the comment that was responding to?
Also stop using the term straw man you don't know what it means none of you know what it means most of the internet doesn't know what it means you just heard it on some YouTube debunking videos.
Nothing.
What does your comment have to with the language being confusing?
I fully understand what gender and sex are and agree with the definitions.
I fully support the trans community and people should dress in anyway they want to. The general crux of my argument was about how muddled the language has become.
Man and woman have lost some of their discriptive nature. As a society that uses spoken language words have to have meaning.
There is a disconnect between what people want to be and what people are. And for some reason when this aspect is brought up people become offended.
Being what one is and wanting to be something else are different things. I want to be rich yet I am poor.
People being a "man" or "woman" going around saying they're not or are something else is confusing and only adds to the negative political nature of this topic.
Why is this issue only localized to gender and sex why not to species? If people called themselves dogs how would that effect the understand of those words?
Matt the idiot Walsh goes around asking aboriginals in Africa to define what a woman is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen btw.
In the eyes of a stranger people are what they appear to be. If one looks like a man I will call them sir. If one looks like a woman I will call them ma'am. I'm not being offensive, I'm just trying to be polite.
If Apple were forced by law to manufacture iPhones exclusively in the U.S., they wouldn't go under they'd adapt. They have the money (~$54B in liquidity), the brand loyalty, and the organizational muscle to pull it off.
There are ~7 million unemployed people in the U.S. plenty of potential labor, especially if Apple funds large-scale training and leans hard into automation. Would it be expensive? Absolutely. Costs would skyrocket. You're probably looking at a $1,800–$2,000 iPhone. But guess what? People would still buy it.
They’d need 5–10 years to fully build out fabs, assembly plants, and domestic supply chains, but it’s feasible. TSMC is already building fabs in Arizona. Apple would just have to scale that approach to the rest of the production ecosystem.
Forced U.S. iPhone manufacturing wouldn’t kill Apple. It’d just make them the biggest American manufacturer since WWII.
The issue is like for every other major corporation in this country is that they're just cheap bastards.
I work in the repair industry and what I tell all my clients when I do warranty work for them if it's the difference between repairing their item or the CEO of the warranty company getting a new yacht it's always going to be the yacht first.
O no half a billion dollars.
There's no way one of the biggest and most profitable companies in human history won't be able to financially recover from this horrific fine.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/10/apple-reports-fourth-quarter-results/
O wait they made 95 BILLION in just the last quarter of 2024?
Nevermind.