I think it’s a lot more black and white being trans than people realize and I have my own pet theories about what gender euphoria /dysphoria is that I observe as being two independent factors.

Half of the problem I think in reaching people is that the vast majority of cis people don’t have an observed internal gender preference. We are trying to build empathy with something we as trans people assume they have too - but maybe only a small minority of cis people experience it. I don’t think we actually understand cis people, we just assume a bunch of things about them using trans people as a false opposite.

Thing is… If I am correct, the assumed massive earth shaking regret of what would happen if a cis person went through gender reassignment… Is they might just adapt and be fine.

I have pointed out to people before that trans women athletes in practice tend to not outperform all women in the sport. The data we have puts them as no more competitive as women with naturally high testosterone and depending on sport can actually be at a disadvantage…

But there’s another underlying assumption. You assume your athlete went through masculinizing puberty first and then a female puberty second. If you skip that first step then you don’t see major differences of frame, weight distribution or muscle mass.

Where this stings is that laws are forcing people to go through that first puberty regardless of the wishes of the paitent, the patients families, the paitents doctors and the concensus of the medical associations of those doctors… And then the government sits back and demonizes those people based on their physicality as a logistical social problem for the rest of their lives and ostracizes them based on this logic.

Athletes squew young. If you allowed through trans athletes who went through the transition process young enough or looked at sport with trans populations and statistically assessed whether any excessive advantage was afforded and allow in those instances where none was found you could solve for any statistical stand out issues within a decade…

But no, we are having this inane conversation because it suits some government parties to make people feel that trans people are a threat or a problem that must be stopped and that there is zero reasonable inclusion policies.

It isn’t that there’s tons of trans athletes… It’s that even at fairly low levels of sport there are currently more options available to people with disabilities to participate then there are of people of intersex and trans backgrounds. In a lot of cases tracking performances of trans athletes they aren’t dominating. There’s stories of transfem athletes who regularly sit around getting 15th place but after coming in first one time the entire sporting becomes hostile to trans people.

In civil rights discussions there’s a concept of rights of participation. The concept being that being barred from social, political or recreational spheres creates outsized harms on the ability to make the advantageous connections others are given free access to and creates classes of segregation.

There’s also a catch 22 situation. If someone opts to go through a trans puberty instead of a natal one there is no meaningful difference to speak of between the physicality of trans athletes and cis ones. If forced to stay inside their original sex segregated sport not only are trans people being being told in no uncertain terms that society does not accept their new status regardless of parity, they essentially become isolated inside the sporting body. Either you have someone whose body is feminine placed in a sport with only cis males to be compared to or you have a masculine body placed inside a group with all cis women and both will be framed out of being taken at all seriously inside the entire body of that sport. A lot of trans people can’t participate in sport not because they aim to be picked for any of the social leg ups excellence in sport provides… But for any of the regular benefits of just participating.

It creates a fair sting to have a government force your choice of initial puberty that neither you or your doctors and parents thought was a good idea… and then sit back and watch the rest of society constantly punish and isolate you for going through that puberty by then treating you as a logistical social problem for the rest of your life.

Segregated sports based on a demographic like that isn’t as trans affirming as you would think… My gut reaction as a trans person is about the same aversion I imagine a person of color would experience if a white person tried to put forward a “People of Color sport league”.

Ditching us all into a new category like we’re quarantined in sport away from other athletes because we’re implicitly not cis… Isn’t something I would appreciate.

You are halfway there. Those examples you gave define constructs but a lot of these things are not what philosophy uses to define social constructs. Scientific taxonomy constructs and linguistic constructs are things but they are fairly useless in discussion surrounding social constructs because while different cultures might draw the line differently around what exactly constitutes a “chair” vs say a “stool” or some such that’s more of just a linguistic boundry. Its basically always a thing you sit on.

Philosophy uses a bunch of different ideas labeled as different forms of construct to break down the idea of how different types of categorization or subjection happen… but when they start talking about “social” constructs they are specifically talking about categories of human interactions with something that have incredibly variable different potential contexts based on culture. It also requires things which are included or excluded from those category for not entirely practical reasons. Philosophy uses this to talk about how social categories are subjective creating or allieving tension between different cultural groups.

Food is actually a good example. There are a lot of things culturally considered food and non food items despite those items all having nutritional value and being safe to consume. In our increasingly cosmopolitan world a lot of expansion has happened to increase the size of the category. Like raw fish was not considered a food item by a lot of people when and where I was growing up. Now sashimi is everywhere and no one bats an eye. Digging for another example mice are technically edible but even raised and slaughtered cleanly very few would consider them valid as food. Whether what I put on your plate is deemed an disgusting insult or a delicious delicacy is really in the eye of the beholder and has caused a number of historical diplomatic and cultural issues around other cultures veiwing each other as inferior.

Just because something is a construct does not automatically make it a social construct.

Food is a social construct. For a social construct to exist you have to have a social category with shifting goalposts based on different context and cultural factors that are not rigidly defined. Like “Fat” - what is considered fat for a person is based on context. A supermodel is fat for being 5’9 and 145lbs but we would call a constructiom labourer skinny as fuck at those same dimensions. Each culture constructs it’s own version of what defines “fat” which is different and distinct from something than the medical guidelines for obesity or an expectation of reasonable health. “Fat” is in the eye of the beholder and represents overlapping cultural circles with varying degrees of consideration of what is excluded from the category.

The scientific concept of nutritional substance is not how we always define “food”. Culturally people contest what is considered food vs non food items based on cultural factors. Like eating mice for instance does have nutritional value but there are a lot of people who would contest them as being a valid food item even if they were raised in clean conditions due to cultural adversions. “That isn’t food.” has been uttered in all sincerity by people encountering strange delicacies that their culture has taboos against eating beliving it dangerous, unpleasant or just categorically not something intended to be eaten. Thus “food” would be in part a sociologically constructed category.

Canadian here, we don’t do that either. Primaries is one of the many additional structural barriers to representive voting being adopted in the US and a step away from having more than two parties in their system. It also increases the campaign costs for candidates and exacerbates the issues with first past the post voting meaning running people becomes an exclusive exercise for the wealthy or people with wealthy patrons who make handshake agreements.

As I understand it, Instead of having parties internally figure out who they are running on the docket as party head like sane people they open it up to basically a second first past the post election of internal candidates. You register as a member of those parties when you register to vote to participate (or not) in the election before the actual election. Personally to one outside that system that just seems like an additional bundle of problems to deal with by doubling down an already outdated voting system that creates further issues of populism but some Americans are very fond of archaic systems. You know something something founders of our nation blah blah can’t change anything our fathers who art in 6ft of dirt didn’t personally come up with blah.

Forgive my glibness. Being a neighbour is hard sometimes.

As a Socialist that subscribes more to the historical strain of Saint Simone and Robert Owen that broke out and away early from Marxism to become the Chartist movement and the history of American non-Marxist socialism … I am often tired of how one note Tankies are. They seem obsessed with a sort of internal purity which denies a rich history of socialism other than Marx and Engles. Once one of them goes off about Stalinism or Maoism I basically just disengage because at that point they are basically so enamored with the aesthetics of communism that they aren’t going to be listening to anything. They want to be devout to the ideology while whitewashing the bloodstains of past failures. I understand a collectivist mindset is more or less what Marx aims to cultivate in his work but it seems often at the cost of tolerance of any level of apostasy.

The flattening of a mass of political thought into cardboard cuttouts to snipe at and sneering at the range of Socialism hybrids with No True Scotsman flavour condescension as political ideologies simply not complete worldviews in their own right has got me rather depressed in dealing with the average Communist on here. People in general often just seem to want to find something simple and easy to hate.

Irrelevant.

Do you think that necklace makes you look sexy? Does it give you confidence to wear it out? Great! Confidence is sexy. Having something you do for yourself is sexy. Anyone who falls for you is gunna probably think that necklace is cool either because they are gunna associate it with you and it is gunna make them smile because you obviously like wearing it. Think of the accessory worn by your favorite character - that could be how someone who really likes you reacts to your accessory in the future.

If someone thinks it’s not their style or thinks it looks dumb if it’s a deal breaker they kinda shallow and you’re better off without… and if they value your feelings they are gunna think your attachment to the thing is cute.

Embrace the pendant. Life is too short to deny yourself the things you like.

Gunna take this as Liberal/Conservative as party brand names rather than strict social ideology and you’re talking about “the left” more generally.

I think the short answer is empathy. When you dig down to the bottom a lot of the discussion on the left talks about different forms of human needs. A need to feel accepted and loved, desires to exist publicly without fear… It is a radical form of empathy that asks you to put yourself in multiple pairs of shoes and see the world through perspectives you aren’t naturally born into. The ultimate aim is to achieve a picture of humanity which is inclusive of the widest possible range of understanding.

In that way “Conservatives” are also people. It is not impossible to empathize with their issues. It takes a lot cognitively to internalize this new data and a lot of the rejection from the right comes not from outright cruelty but a desire for things to be and remain simple and easy. They don’t want to stretch themselves and are scared of a world where that is something they are forced to do. The issue is a lot of the people selling the pitchforks on that side are doing it because it benefits them. That desire to understand encompasses the motives of individual Conservatives and splits them apart. A lot of the issues Conservatives have is that the left is “preachy” that we act like we’re better than them and that does come from somewhere. Some leftists do just want to be the smartest most correct person in the room but others are just waiting for the Conservatives they know to be more understanding of other people who they learned about so they stop being mean. The person who pitties the school bully is often their target because that empathy seems to the bully like condescension.

Uh… Was this in response to the right post? I am not vegan nor do I wish to be and I never mentioned anything about rice and beans…

Half my social circle has gone vegan at this point and I think a lot of the anti-vegan sentiments is people don’t like modifying their behaviour to give up their own comfort even when they know something is distressing to someone else. Since a lot of vegans see a very real cruelty that they are generally powerless to stop and other people do not understand their reactions to seeing other people participate in cruelty is often to feel very sad. Since so much of human culture surrounds shared meals having a vegan takes a lot of options off the table entirely and alters other people’s options even when they don’t intend to.

Like it’s not a matter of “well we’ll go to your vegetarian restaurant this time and next time we go to a place I’m excited to go” for those of us who care about our friends being upset we basically rarely pick our first choices and more often sacrifice things we are excited for in the name of someone else’s comfort. It can be a love language to find restaurants and eat the things on the menu that don’t exactly thrill you but other times you just want to have that selfish Birthday dinner where you don’t feel compelled to pick a restaurant for someone else.

I think a lot of people reject veganism more forcefully because they don’t want to have to participate in that sort of friction. All it takes is one ethical vegan to completly change a friend groups food culture. Even when they bring their own food and try not to make a big deal and mask it not bothering them when they see meat being consumed people are generally compelled to care for people they know and ignoring someone’s distress isn’t showing care. When people ratchet up the social cost of veganism they are more often than not trying to engineer a social sphere where they do not feel callous, don’t have to give up what they like and don’t have to do any additional research work or social calculations .

In Canada voting is considered a Charter Right (or basic level of freedom nessisary to preserving human dignity and right of participation in society). While I keep pushing for voting reform regarding the first past the post system it’s definitely something I think we got right. Everyone should decide what sort of society we live in including those who have run afoul of it in some way or another.

Basically alcohol and the tiniest smidgen of weed. I am allergic to hops and pot as it turns out so wheezing like I am dying or throwing up doesn’t seem worth the plusses. Still figure I got off lightly though, got a buddy who can’t go into cities or near concerts because one whiff will send her into anaphylaxis.

As for everything else I just am leery. Too many elementary school buddies dead from Fentanyl and I saw a lot of really fucked up shit from my friend’s addict parents when I was a kid.

Fiction wise - Ted Lasso. The show has a lot of arcs about guys (and gals) struggling with various issues surrounding mental health and everybody evolving into a healthier and more wholesome place. If you want to see guys being absolute Bros and just weep for people being wholesome and cool can’t recommend enough.

It starts with the expectation it’s just gunna be a inspiring feel good sports story and then just goes so far above and beyond the norm it’s practically a new genre.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding of some inclusivity in regards to non-binary identities here.

There are a lot of grey areas that use different words very specifically. Masc and Femme for instance describe a wider range of binary and non-binary identities than “Man and Woman” as many non-binary people are closer to binary trans folks but use a different set of mental mechanisms where they don’t strictly align with the categories of “man and woman”. Masc and Femme can be used with “presenting” to specify what people tend to read someone as based on cultural dress and behaviour or but left as is to describe gender identity.

On the other pole of talking about sex rather than gender or gender presentation some have started to move away from “assigned gender at birth” and use descriptives like " male/female phenotypic (or type for short) when needing to refer to one’s physicality to describe aspects when talking strictly about lived experience regarding their body’s sexual characteristics.

The trans community particularly has a lot of very specific language regarding how different aspects of our experience impacts us. For instance a male phenotypic person will have certain aspects assumed about them because of their body independent of their gender which given certain circumstances they need to talk about in a neutral way. Talking about sex can be a bit of a landmine situation in trans circles because it’s both a touchy subject and it’s where the most dogwhistles tend to be. As such it’s a bit chaotic… As such Phenotype does not strictly mean “birth sex”. It’s more about what physical sex characteristics people perceive and react to… Trans language wise it’s something not universally adopted or liked but it is consistent with the usage in the above post where the poster is describing people perceived as at least potentially possessing some sexually male characteristics. This covers cis/ trans men/ masc non-binary people, some trans women / femme non-binary and various flavors of non-binary people.

While I can understand feeling like this is a bit much but it’s mostly that language and conventions inside the community and inclusivity forward movements changing rather rapidly to account for the way discourse changes from year to year with new dogwhistles popping up with the evolving discourse as more people become knowledgeable about the basics. Less awkward conventions of language are always being tested because universality is likely a ways away. Trying to be pedantic about it might prove to be a losing battle. Give it another decade or two and it might settle into a singular convention once there’s more concensus.

Queer TTRPG circles on the west coast got this fixed. I can never go back to playing in Completely straight TTRPG culture. Queer TTRPG tables will be like “Can I be a Merperson Paladin of like… Everything spiritual simultaneously and just have to fluidly sync with the nearest divinity while my hyper intelligent mouse sidekick who dresses in a Sherlock Holmes outfit causes random trouble? Oh and can the mermish language be a sign language? " and 9/10 times the answer is " FUCK YEAH! That’s rad! Do you want your mouse to have a tiny magnifying glass?”

Compare that with the grognards telling me sign languages are prohibited because they are " too much of an advantage" and I am just ruined.

There is no true answer to the Tao of hair. I gave up and went around to hair dressers and said "Do whatever you like " until I found the one who made me look good. Now my hair looks amazing like 95% of the time and the remaining 5% is the occasional “just trying a thing” that becomes a temporary conversion piece.

I realized I do not actually know what I want. To believe such was mearly ego. I am going to people who have better trained aesthetic sensibilities, why should I, someone who has no sensibility direct them? I am but a canvas, a scruffy Tabula Rasa.

The DIY though is undoubtedly more cost effective…

As an incredibly and habitually nerdy kid none of my nerd shit had been an obstacle to my parents thinking I’m rad. I taught and ran my Mom through a D&D campaign over Covid…

Also I don’t think a parent who adopts the 'Is your kid cool" mentality is looking to make it another vector to disparage kids but to open adults minds to actually appreciating their kids as people not just little self congratulatory vicarious vindication of success. My parents are not fans of my Brother-in-Law’s family because they refuse to look at their son and my sibling as success on any other metric than acedemic or career related successes. They look at their careers in slightly lower paid but fulfilling careers doing things they feel make the world a better place makes them “the dumbest smart people we know”… The fact their son is just fucking awesome in his own merits just never enters their heads (and makes my Mom mad enough to bite through steel.)

Having parents who are cool is a blessing.

How much damage suburbs strodes and massive footprint drive up box stores actually do. The amount of materials and ecological flattening needed so that everyone can have their own yard with a patch of shit grass. All the concrete reflecting heat into the atmosphere and causing temperature instability, the damage to the water and carbon locking systems we all need to survive because so many people can’t stand being around people outside their own isolated family units or need to find a place to park their car. We need affordable city and high density village housing and flip the script on housing costs heavily incentivizing moving out of suburban areas.

We need more trains and buses but more than that we need design where our land use is treated as an actual resource that requires harm reduction policies instead of just “unused” land because “unused” land is what is keeping the planet alive and if we don’t start reclaiming it we are gunna be in massive trouble.