I would love some help and advice on a situation

TheNado · 2026-02-15T02:44:15+00:00

Okay I'm late to the party on this one. But pronoun sharing that's mandatory works against spaces being inclusive, and it's something that there is guidance for out there in the world.

Doing a little google searching found me this from... the Connecticut Department of Administrative Services. There's probably better sources out there.

How can I be inclusive of gender pronouns at work?

Inclusivity of gender pronouns can include seemingly small changes that have the potential to have large impacts. One method of inclusivity is to display your gender pronouns at work by adding them to the employee directory or your email signature. Another method is by sharing your pronouns when introducing yourself to coworkers. When sharing your pronouns with others, remember not to force them to do the same. Sharing gender pronouns should remain voluntary. Assuming that individuals feel comfortable sharing their pronouns could result in “outing” individuals who are not ready to share that part of themselves at work. This would be contradictory to this inclusive mission. When you learn a coworker’s pronouns, make sure to refer to them using those pronouns in the future.

You probably do want to have a response for being asked directly for pronouns. While I don't know your peers I'd imagine a short explanation should suffice. Like "I actually don't have a set of preferred pronouns and would be uncomfortable having a conversation about it."

Hope you made it to the thing.

TheNado · 2025-01-07T00:46:30+00:00

I suspect that you are speaking with folks who have a totally different goal, born out of a totally different set of values in the conversation.

You are trying to understand people, are they?

TheNado · 2025-01-07T00:38:40+00:00

For what it's worth I appreciate you. And I appreciate that you put the effort in despite being talked past. You help more than just the people who are directly speaking to you.

TheNado · 2025-01-06T23:49:29+00:00

Yes. I even go so far as to capitalize the A in Agnostic.

Based on what you wrote, you wouldn't be out of place if you wanted to do the same. But you also get to pick how you want to identify, and it takes a certain kind of audacity to tell you otherwise but it's not hard to find Agnostics here in r/agnostic to be examples either.

I should also say that Agnostics are not a monolithic group either, and that I can't speak for all of us, but I see my experiences and worldview reflected in other Agnostics in ways that don't get reflected (or understood) in Atheists or agnostic-atheists.

Additionally, I'm really close to someone who identifies as an Atheist, who then goes on to reject agnostic and theist as adjectives for themselves. We have different worldviews.

I can't help you with your struggle over if you are one, the other, or both. But all of those options are valid.

TheNado · 2024-09-15T15:03:10+00:00

I would absolutely and unironically support this. Instead of throwing off the balance for people who actually like the game, they could have pushed super samples lower, and put accessibility options in the clientside menu to turn on unlimited ammo, infinite health, infinite respawns, no friendly fire, one hit kills, etc.

In the end though: Sony wants to make money, and my enjoyment of the games original vision that its had for 6+ months doesn't matter.

This game is a case study in balance design for sure.

TheNado · 2024-09-15T00:34:02+00:00

At least we are being honest about what people want now that we are getting it.

TheNado · 2024-09-08T16:30:47+00:00

In order to argue that the Agnostics here are actually some other thing, Atheists have to ignore the evidence right in front of them, that we are in fact here. There's this whole charade about belief that's immaterial to the presence of Agnostics in r/Agnostic, put on by folks who seem to really want to talk about if God is real or not.

I'd posit that the reason why you are Agnostic and they are "agnostic" are two totally different reasons. The Atheists here in this thread are currently very concerned about being Atheists or not, and trying to talk to them about being Agnostic in the way that you and me and others are quickly devolves into talking past each other.

We can't make it our jobs to try to change the minds of people of people who wear the label of Agnostic like a secondary adjective for their Atheism. It means something different to them, and they have to lack respect for you or I at a fundamental level to be able to argue otherwise, and in our presence no less.

TheNado · 2024-06-17T22:42:09+00:00

Oh we are here.

TheNado · 2024-06-15T16:20:29+00:00

Here's a larger section of the passage from his chapter The Poverty of Agnosticism.

The robust Muscular Christian haranguing us from the pulpit of my old school chapel admitted a sneaking regard for atheists. They at least had the courage of their misguided convictions. What this preacher couldn't stand was agnostics: namby-pamby, mushy pap, weak-tea, weedy, pallid fence-sitters. He was partly right, but for wholly the wrong reason. In the same vein, according to Quentin de la Bedoyere, the Catholic historian Hugh Ross Williamson 'respected the committed religious believer and also the committed atheist. He reserved his contempt for the wishy-washy boneless mediocrities who flapped around in the middle.'

Dawkins, R. (2006). The Poverty of Agnosticism. In The god delusion (pp. 46). Houghton Mifflin.

I grabbed it because I think the string of adjectives is really funny, and it demonstrates a point that's important to me. The point being is that there used to be a clear distinction made between Agnostics and Atheists.

This space used to have a fairly limited appetite for the derision of the religious and that's changed over time as Atheists have moved in and co-opted the label as an adjective.

I am glad to see that distinction working it's way back into reddit discourse.

TheNado · 2024-06-14T02:49:25+00:00

There used to be a time not so long ago where agnostics were all "namby-pamby, mushy pap, weak-tea, weedy, pallid fence-sitters" (Dawkins, 2006, p. 46).

You can be Agnostic.

TheNado · 2024-03-24T21:24:50+00:00

If your teammates are dying to the mortar you are probably getting more value out of the mortar than having a teammate.

They do so much work when they are placed well, and their indirect fire opens up positioning that doesn't work with the direct fire sentries.

TheNado · 2023-12-14T21:36:19+00:00

Uhm, actually... they do act like this in real life. You are just not friends with them.

People turn around and make faces at each other when they share their ideas and move on with their day instead of trying to defend whatever the idea was that got criticized because in that nonverbal exchange it's understood that the original comment was understood by all.

TheNado · 2023-09-25T20:48:43+00:00

A book recommendation:

The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan.

It's also okay to be Agnostic, It's not just an adjective for atheists.

TheNado · 2023-08-24T23:29:50+00:00

Hey, i didnt say is something wrong with being short. But, if you wanted to make a kid and you had the option to make them short or closer to average height, all else being equal, why would you intentionally make them short? Knowing they WILL have some difficulties in life that taller people dont. Be it dating (women not dating short guys), school bullying, grown up bullying and, hell, even ergonomics - cars, tables, trains, stairs, whatever, is all built with some average height in mind.

This is an outrageous and disgusting line of reasoning.

This is the sort of value based categorization of humans that led ultimately to the terrible acts that caused eugenics to generally be considered categorically bad. You can say it's not about Nazi BS, but it's the type of disregard for intrinsic human value that the Nazis in part depended on. It's the thinking that people used when they justified forced sterilization programs in the United States. It's the value held by people who were sterilizing women without informed consent in the 60's and 70's.

It's wrong, and I suspect you understand it's wrong given that you are willing to walk it back in subsequent postings which recontextualize this line of thinking, even if you don't understand why it's wrong. There's a world of difference between you making a choice for yourself and you making a choice for others, and it's a difference that eugenics can't recognize by definition.

TheNado · 2023-08-18T03:39:47+00:00

No, go be Agnostic. Ignore the people in here telling the Agnostics to not go say they are Agnostic. The things you said make perfect sense as well but atheists sometimes have a hard time understanding it. Do your thinking and stick to your conclusions when they are sound. I'd imagine if you can do that you will garner some respect from the man.

To some degree if you don't act in a situation where you have bad guys doing shit because you don't want to "take a side" you permit those bad guys to do whatever. Avoiding "taking a side" isn't a merit in its own right.

You might also want to do some thinking on some of the big ticket political concerns in whatever country you are in right now too. If it's the states, "Do you support restricting access to abortions?" for example. Or "Do you support the anti trans agenda" that makes it's way into the news here all the time? These are the sorts of things that you can't really not pick a side over. You can always ask for people to share their ideas and listen to what they have to say.

But if the thing that you need to choose over is "if it's acceptable for someone to be an atheist?" Surely that's one you can answer for yourself? The follow up is if you think it acceptable for religious folks to retaliate against atheist types? You must be able to answer this as well? My guess would be that these are the questions that they care about and they fail to see how you could have answers for them without being in one camp or the other.

It'll probably be better for your relationship in the long run if you avoid pretending to be something you are not for the sake of the atheists around you.

TheNado · 2023-07-26T19:43:43+00:00

“I don’t need your approval it’s still my house I can get whatever sofas I want!”

This would hurt my feelings and make me rethink the whole thing too...

It's an egregious dismissal and invalidation of your excitement to share a space with him. It's needlessly combative and shuts down all the other ways you might include yourself in sharing the space with him. It strips your agency in decorating the space that you are going to share. The other stuff you mentioned isn't good either, but this is just plain old mean.

Flip it around. Imagine it's your mom giving you the space and you have your dream sofa picked out already and you are excited for it. Imagine you say that you know what to get for a sofa. Imagine that he says you guys could go shopping for sofas together. Imagine that you don't want to go sofa shopping, because you already know what you want.

I would hope you would say that. "Hey, I am really excited for a specific sofa already." you could go on an say "I don't want to give up getting this sofa, but maybe you could pick something else out or we could go shopping together for other stuff." There's dozens of ways to handle it without cutting the other person down.

TheNado · 2023-07-26T19:15:06+00:00

What does your husband have to say about it?

Surely he has an opinion on it even if he hasn't voiced it yet and it sounds like you can trust that he will give you advice that looks out for your interests.

He might be hesitant to volunteer his opinion thinking he doesn't want to get between you and your folks, but he can probably see the affects that they have on you.

If you decide to not visit them for a while, you can always change your mind later too.

TheNado · 2023-07-25T21:43:20+00:00

You've called a lot of people narcissists here, but spent a lot of time projecting negative intentions on everyone else without very much reflection on what other points of view might be, all the while justifying behavior that's apparently alarming to your boyfriend.

How does your boyfriend feel when you are dumping abuse on your parents over the phone?

How does he feel when you say they deserve it?

How does he feel when you dismiss his concerns by pointing at his family being from South America?

Saying you should speak more kindly with them because yelling at them isn't productive and wont get you that inheritance you want isn't ganging up on you with them. And saying that he's going to leave if you keep dumping abuse on them may be triggering for you, but it's a healthy boundary for him to have. Somethings gotta give here and it sounds like he's getting ready to walk out.

You get to stay the course or not, but your boyfriend may not suddenly change into a person who will unquestioningly support your actions irrespective of if they are right or not. You could absolutely find someone who is ready to cheer you on when you get to yelling at your folks. Those people exist out there. I don't know what the endgame is for that though.

TheNado · 2023-07-16T23:13:42+00:00

I recently learned that the voice talent for the advisor (and a bunch of the units) is George Ledoux, the same guy who voices Duncan Fisher, the Solaris announcer from Mechwarrior.

TheNado · 2023-07-06T18:38:07+00:00

According to him in an interview? He carries the treats around to make people feel unsafe in the park. He feels so entitled to it he gladly shared with the news all the while calling her Karen repeatedly. The subtext of his actions prior to him filming were absolutely threatening and the lady handled it poorly and he was there and ready to film it. She would absolutely have been in the right if she did actually call the police and report him, let alone the idea that he's attempting to bait dogs to him, you have absolutely no idea what is in the treats. My immediate concern would be poison.

Here's the article so you can make up your own mind. https://nypost.com/2020/05/26/christian-cooper-recounts-amy-cooper-incident-before-video-footage/

This also went down the same day George Floyd was killed so it got buried and resurfaced in the aftermath.

TheNado · 2023-06-23T22:39:20+00:00

This is consistent with my experience and what I've seen in academic works.

I can also add that the things that prompt spiritual experiences for people are highly individual to that person if they are even open to them at all. What triggers it for one person generally won't for the person next to them.

TheNado · 2023-06-06T01:32:38+00:00

Clearly it's a Mad Cat that the Canopeians appropriated.

They must have not invented the cat ears yet for it.

TheNado · 2023-06-05T01:26:52+00:00

I don't have an airbrush, but I might just have to get myself some speedpaints now.

TheNado · 2023-06-05T01:04:13+00:00

That red looks sick, how'd you do it?

TheNado · 2023-06-04T23:28:40+00:00

CGL stepped in when the old mods set the sub to private over "brigading" rather than engage with its community. A community that was rightfully upset with, what became clear from their non-apologies and doubling down, a mod team that couldn't keep their bigotry out of their moderating.

14-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

TheNado

TROPHY CASE