But you're arguing that the "modern" period is over and that whatever one's philosophical bent is, that philosophers in this era are producing post-modern philosophy?

Yea there are always legacy effects, you will find thinkers etc using last years paradigm across the board in any time period.

The point is that you can have someone thinking in a modernist way in 2022 even though it will most likely be crammed full of unexpressed post modern assumptions that a post modernist will easily be able to point out, but you wont have a post modernist in 1922.

Modernist philosophy has a set of underlying principles and post modernists are the set of principles that appear after/post that.

When modernism was new and radical you still had people banging on about needs more theology etc.

Alright, get that post-modern donut eating stuff outta here, and let's talk about this enbie:



Yes, this person who looks like what I imagine a right-wing spoof of a non-binary person would look like, is a DOE official in charge of something about nuclear waste, and has been arrested for the second time in a month for stealing someone else's luggage at an airport.
They are not doing anything good for the image of the US trans/NB community.

He has multiple personality disorder too?

This is terrible posting and is just out right naked bigotry, and that is not being just thrown about.

Its a person who is behaving sub optimally, apparently as you dont provide any cites etc.

That they are transgender has nothing to do with it at all in anyway whatsoever and using their individual behaviours as means to make judgements about the "community" of trans/nb is exactly what constitutes bigotry in this instance.

shanda fur die goyim

You’re not doing anything good for the image of the US bigot community but here we are.

As excited as 57 was about this story (omg! a bad non-binary person! quick post post post!), at least he kept his criticism to the bad thing the person did, and not go on this weird bit about their looks.

You're quoting the wrong person. Chillrob was the one who - disgustingly - brought up this person as an example of not looking good for the LGBT community. Their actions had nothing to do with being LGBT even if "omg a bad LGBT person quick post it ITT!!!!" wasn't a terrible way to engage with these issues. And notice how none of the crew ITT posts examples of straight people doing random bad things and suggesting that makes straight people look bad.

This is all in contrast to identifying when an LGBT person is a victim because they are LGBT.

If they are victimised for being LGBTQ then obviously LGBTQ is a factor.

If someone who is LGBTQ commits some random crime such as baggage theft their sexuality is nothing to do with it and is not something that should be highlighted and remarked on.

How is this hard?

Maybe try solving for X and then thinking about it, smart guy.

Because you nor he will define any evidence you would ever accept. That is the game on subjects like this were all the evidence is correlative and not causative. If you refuse to then define anything as 'acceptable' you can just hand wave away everything.


A rightee, on the gun topic, can and does do the exact same thing. You will never get them to define what could 'constitute proof' for them. You can never get them to say what they would 'accept', as proof. As nothing can be shown to be definitive or directly causative and so they can just reject as not proof TO THEM.

Its a game both sides have learned to play on topics like this where evidence is not demonstrable proof.

Even uke can see there is no other point of distinction you tried to make despite the fact he will suddenly jump in to circle jerk and deny his prior words now.

Notice how in this post you just say 'that was not it' as you now are embarrassed but what you do not try to do is fashion another argument you could have been addressing.

Yes, but then they should be treated like anyone else too.

that means they should be let go immediatly and not be applied petty politics to.


"Brinton is the first openly gender-fluid individual in federal government leadership, and uses they and them pronouns" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Brinton

and they turn out to be cleptomanics and liars..
not great for lgtbq+!

"Non-binary Biden nuclear official Sam Brinton accused in second luggage heist"
https://nypost.com/2022/12/09/biden-...luggage-heist/

Didn't Netflix receive a huge shitstorm recently for adding the LGBTQwhatver tag to Dahmer?

For some reason, that was apparently not quite the kind of representation they mean, when crying "Diversity and Inclusion" every opportunity they get.

they are all right in the social media, it's a big embarrassment.

He does look a bit strange, which I guess he can if he wants. There may be an issue as to whether any of the women's clothing in which he has posed for pictures was stolen for 'trophy' purposes, which would be creepy, but at the moment it's sub judice. There may also be an issue in regard to government indulging and enabling a narcissist because he ticks certain boxes, which would be sub-optimal, and there also appears to be an issue with his backstory of 'conversion therapy', which now looks suspiciously like a fictive (and narcissistic) invention.

Do you think I should have posted about this in the "other news" section instead? It seemed to me that this would be the proper forum to discuss someone who is currently the highest profile non-binary person in the country.

Having a sexuality tag on TV shows seems inappropriate to me, but if that's what you're doing, it seems appropriate to tag the show about Dahmer. Unlike the luggage thief, his actions did have something to do with his sexuality.

Maybe you could have tried posting it in the fashion section of the forum since your post was emphasizing the way they looked?

Another option - scandalous though I know it is - is that just because a LGBT person did a bad thing someone doesn't mean you have to run to the forum to post it at all. Notice how you have never shared a story of a straight cis person doing something bad and accompanied it with the thought provoking question of whether they make straight cis people look bad?

This might blow your mind, but just like the rest of us, LGBT people can have different political views.