Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Adopts A New Code of Conduct Based On The LLVM CoC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by setbel View Post
    They seem pretty compatible to me. Postmodernism rejects and belittles everything, including morality and culture. Marxism makes the economic structure the base and everything else is a superstructure (a derivation of it), including morality and culture. Both are pretty cynical views of humanity. Not judging you if you like them, it's just my opinion.
    "They seem pretty compatible to me"
    As I said, both are incompatible and, as a Marxist, I dislike postmodernism. Postmodernism does not reject morality and culture, anti-discrimination is morality and, for postmodernists, everything is cultural, this is why they reject objective science, but they do not reject culture at all. Your view on Marxism is closer to reality, the economic structure is the base for Marxists, but that's not exclusive to Marxism and I find that it is somewhat true. Economy is the most important part of a productive society's organization, no matter the ideology (socialism, capitalism…). Now, Marxist do have a morality, the idea that workers should get the product of their work is a morality. Maybe that the morality of postmodernists and Marxists is not the same as yours but it is still a morality, and for culture, well, I can attest that Marxists, (as postmodernists), are commonly involved in cultural activities, so, they do not reject culture, they just believe that western traditional culture should not lead the society. Your view on culture and morality is probably different from both, Marxists' and postmodernists', but that does not mean they reject it, they do have morality, culture, just not the same as yours.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by paupav View Post
      I can assure that nobody is using Dr. Sgt. or any other prefixes in Open Source communities and remembering it is useless thing. Keep your 824124 genders to yourself, it doesn't show your value and purpose in society as does Dr or as does hierarchy where it is needed when using Sgt. It consists important information for the most people in certain parts of society.
      Whether you think it serves a purpose or not doesn't matter. It's a matter of following social norms and the rules of discourse. If you are talking to someone in person, and they say "Please call me Dr. Whatever" - the proper and polite thing to do is call them "Dr. Whatever". If you purposely call them something else to their face - they are going to get agitated, and you are going to see repercussions because of it.
      It just makes your force people to remember something that has no value to them. He or she is used if you don't know someones role in society. Sgt is useful in military in many ways, but your gender isn't useful information to anyone.
      Once again, it doesn't matter if it has value to you - it has value and is important to them. I personally think pet goldfish are pointless and stupid, but if my girlfriend asked me to feed her fish while she went away on a trip - you bet I would. Why? Because it's important to her, and I respect her. If she comes back to a dead fish, and I explain to her that goldfish are ultimately unimportant and are useless, I'm going to end up with no girlfriend. If someone has a particular name or title they prefer to be called - I will call them that, because clearly it's important to them, and I respect them.
      I am not calling anyone Jew or associate people with any group since I don't care what group someone is.
      You said: "We all know what happens when you start forcing people to accept your belief system or your religion." My point was that no one is forcing to "accept" their beliefs or their "religion". No one is forcing you to be a non-binary gender. No one is forcing you to be gay/straight. No one is forcing you to accept a non-birth given name. No one is forcing you to adopt that lifestyle. They are simply asking that you address them by whatever they preferred to be called.
      I'm all about individualism instead of neo-marxist values and I call people in gender they look to be part of. such as he or she. Calling anyone Zi doesn't add any value to society.
      So if you see a man, that happens to look female (long hair, slim body, no facial hair). but is otherwise straight/cisgendered, you will call them a girl/she/her because they look like one? ..and you will continue to do so after they correct you that they are indeed a straight man?
      should we have gender classes to learn all genders and imagine remembering all those pronouns
      No? Just like how you don't have a class to remember every single possible name, you just need to remember what people ask you to call them. If I ask you to call me Larry, don't call me Tom just because you can't be bothered to remember the name Larry.
      I'm all for preventing hate speech but I'm also for not forcing anyone to force me to do or say anything. Those are 2 different things
      No one is forcing you to do anything. They are simply asking that you address them by their preferred gender/name. Don't want to follow those rules? Don't participate in the discussion. Simple.
      Last edited by AmericanLocomotive; 10 June 2020, 10:41 AM.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by paupav
        Since nobody can deny that there are actually genetically 2 genders instead of 52
        "gender" is a social construct. For genetics there is only sex.
        Male/female is sex, not gender.
        Man/woman is gender, not sex.

        Being a social construct you can have all you want as gender and the only requirement is that everyone agrees on it. There is no "right number" of genders". It's all arbitrary.

        The sane and rational way forward is drop genders entirely, and use the same pronouns for everything.

        From a purely linguistic standpoint, this would massively simplify a lot of languages where even inanimate objects have been assigned (arbitrarily) genders for unknown reasons, and must use gender-specific pronouns for inanimate objects too (italian and spanish for example).
        Last edited by starshipeleven; 10 June 2020, 11:05 AM.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by paupav
          Wow COC that is not based on postmodern neo-marxist ideas. Is it even possible in 21st century?

          EDIT: reply



          That is actually not true. There is obviously 2 genders not as some news agencies standardize it to be 52 or 81 genders.






          Since nobody can deny that there are actually genetically 2 genders instead of 52 and the fact that extremist left don't represent working class anymore since working people are more likely to vote for lower taxes and less government intervention. Extreme left now strive on identity politics they are now using LGBT community for their goals some psychologists are calling them postmodern neo-marxist and I completely agree with them. They are completely refusing to accept biology (postmodern part) and are calling for neo-marxist ideas.
          "nobody can deny that there are actually genetically 2 genders instead of 52"
          This is factually false for several reasons. First, XX and XY, while the most common, are not the only existing genotypes. Second, the observed sex of an individual can be different from the one prescribed by his/her genotype. Third, gender is NOT sex. Male gender, in our society, prevents you from wearing a dress, this is NOT biological (and, if you look at some old painting, you can see European kings in dress, thighs and heels, so this is not at all invariable). Gender, unlike biological sex, is a social construct. It may be based on sex but it is NOT sex.

          "working people are more likely to vote for lower taxes and less government intervention"
          I do not know for your country, but in my country (France), even right-wing "working class" usually wants more government intervention and taxes for rich (but not for them). So this is factually false, at least in some countries. But the fact that people vote for some government does not mean that this government actually represents their interest, it just means they have good propaganda. (Trump is a pro of fake-based social media propaganda)

          "some psychologists are calling them postmodern neo-marxist"
          Most psychologists are what you call "postmodern neo-marxists" (usual moderate)…

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by AmericanLocomotive View Post
            Whether you think it serves a purpose or not doesn't matter. It's a matter of following social norms and the rules of discourse. If you are talking to someone in person, and they say "Please call me Dr. Whatever" - the proper and polite thing to do is call them "Dr. Whatever". If you purposely call them something else to their face - they are going to get agitated, and you are going to see repercussions because of it.
            One point not mentioned here but is a part of our social norm as well. Are you allowed to be called the way you want to be called? If I haven't done a phd im not allowed to be called Dr. (this does not apply to an art context - like Dr. Bend - the artist with extreme body properties).
            This is/was an issue if you are a transgender, too. But how far can you go? Individualism and dignity versus feasibility.
            If you have a national database with all your citizens how difficult is it to change the entries for possible genders?
            Especially if everything is run on two entries since the very beginning of those Databases. Im not arguing that it should be done or shouldn't be done. I totally support the rights of LGBT community.
            I just want to try to understand both sides. Because I think people being against this wide gender pluralism are simply overwhelmed by the amount of additional effort to learn the conventions and apply them in daily life. Especially if they know that this might "only" apply to a minority of 1/1000 or even less 1/10 000 according to this figures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transsexual#Prevalence.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
              "gender" is a social construct. For genetics there is only sex.
              Male/female is sex, not gender.
              Man/woman is gender, not sex.
              But how do you define the sex of hermaphrodite? Is she a she because she has breast but a penis too? Or he is a he because he has a penis but breasts too?
              At least at this point you have to involve the psychological development and therefore also the way how a person defines [her-,him-,..,(end)]-self.
              Some hypothesis states that the hormons got mixed up in certain development states of a person leading to transsexualism *. One can say ...e.g. a womans brain in a male body or vice versa. So how do you define the sex in this case without the taking into consideration both biological and social elements?

              ....after so much trigger words ...will this get approved?

              *a very simplified version of this hypothesis but to make it an useable argument it was necessary to outline it this way.
              Last edited by CochainComplex; 10 June 2020, 11:39 AM.

              Comment


              • #47
                I'm not saying that I won't respect and call people by their preferred gender I'm just saying that it shouldn't be part of CoC and that there is no reason to have 52 genders other than trying to differentiate yourself from others. How much % you are male of female isn't really important in open source community.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
                  One point not mentioned here but is a part of our social norm as well. Are you allowed to be called the way you want to be called? If I haven't done a phd im not allowed to be called Dr. (this does not apply to an art context - like Dr. Bend - the artist with extreme body properties).
                  This is/was an issue if you are a transgender, too. But how far can you go? Individualism and dignity versus feasibility.
                  If you have a national database with all your citizens how difficult is it to change the entries for possible genders?
                  Especially if everything is run on two entries since the very beginning of those Databases. Im not arguing that it should be done or shouldn't be done. I totally support the rights of LGBT community.
                  I think it comes down to intent. If you want someone to address you as she/her because you feel in strongest possible conviction that you are a woman, than I see no problem. If on the other hand you want people to address you as "Dr.", and you are using that title to gain power/influence over someone/something - then no, that is not appropriate.

                  I tend to assume by default that there is no malice with someones desired title or pronouns. My logic tends to look like this: Does whatever the person wants you to call them materially affect anything of importance (besides their own feelings)? If the answer is "No", then it doesn't matter. If they want you to call them "Dr." and they're giving medical advice as if they are in some position of authority to do so (despite never being to medical school), then that's another story and their credentials should be scrutinized.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
                    One point not mentioned here but is a part of our social norm as well. Are you allowed to be called the way you want to be called? If I haven't done a phd im not allowed to be called Dr. (this does not apply to an art context - like Dr. Bend - the artist with extreme body properties).
                    "Dr. Bend" is a stage name that has 0 legal value (besides being a trademark probably), I can have my friends call me "Dr. biggus dickus" and it's also perfectly fine as it has no legal value. When this performer signs legal stuff, he will be using his real name, or it will have nullified the document.

                    By law you cannot ask to be called Dr. or Eng. Dr. or other similar things on legal documents and name cards as only people that have the appropriate degree can do that.

                    If it is not a "reserved" thing, then it's between you and other people, if you can convince them that they should call you in some way, it's OK, if you can't convince them, it's also OK, there is no law forcing either way.

                    This is/was an issue if you are a transgender, too. But how far can you go? Individualism and dignity versus feasibility.
                    If you have a national database with all your citizens how difficult is it to change the entries for possible genders?
                    Especially if everything is run on two entries since the very beginning of those Databases.
                    The national database records biological sex as that matters for medical reasons (i.e. ovary cancer does not care about your gender, if you have ovaries you are at risk). There is no need to add anything to that. The state should not give a shit about your sexual orientation or identity anyway so there is no point in recording that at all.

                    Apart from that, just get a law out to make every institution drop the "M or F" questions unless there are valid medical reasons to ask for sex. It really serves no fucking purpose even now, when women are supposed to be equal to men, or so I'm told.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
                      But how do you define the sex of hermaphrodite?
                      hermaphrodites have no sex, by definition. Asexual reproduction and all that.

                      Are we discussing slugs or alien lifeforms now? Because I was under the strong impression that humans weren't a hermaphrodite species.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X