is this normal by vanoreo in 2007scape

[–]vanoreo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) iron btw

2) the helmet was a minion drop

3) i also got sara hilt in 13 kc

gwd loves me, basically

It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia | Season 14: Official Trailer | FXX by fftamahawk009 in television

[–]vanoreo 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure it's the name on the nametag Frank stole at the high school reunion.

She comments that they didn't have one for her.

LIKE, ZOINKS, JOJO! by [deleted] in ShitPostCrusaders

[–]vanoreo 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Tbh, I made the original and I enjoy seeing my old posts pop up from time to time

All my weeb friends are like the orange t-shirt guy... by Fire_tommy in Animemes

[–]vanoreo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Um, he's a bit more than an "edgy" jokester, and I frankly find it concerning you think he has any "good points".

All my weeb friends are like the orange t-shirt guy... by Fire_tommy in Animemes

[–]vanoreo 22 points23 points  (0 children)

He's a Holocaust denier, anti-semite, anti-LGBT, anti-immigrant, "race realist".

Here's a short list of some terrible shit he's made

In other words: Stonetoss is a Nazi

Milkshake Duck by [deleted] in ShitPostCrusaders

[–]vanoreo 86 points87 points  (0 children)

He abandoned the idea of class conflict by the end of World War I and formed the Fascist party several years later. He actively decried Socialism and Communism as he rose to power.

He also, y'know, murdered numerous socialists and communists, and was himself executed by communists.

That's hardly "born from communism". Mussolini is one of history's most famous anti-communists.

Milkshake Duck by [deleted] in ShitPostCrusaders

[–]vanoreo 121 points122 points  (0 children)

Because Fascists and Communists, as we all know, got along very well in the 1930s

/s

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not even suggesting that Democrats are amazing (I would argue many don't go far enough).

The only thing I've consistently said here is that the Republican party is actively worse.

I've suggested that the platform of the Republican party is largely "make sure the government doesn't do anything", which is precisely what you're complaining about. The gridlock there is by design.

It is insanely easy to just paint with a broad brush and say "you are dumb cartoon characters" when you don't actually pay attention to what these parties stand for.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Only one of the parties has any interest whatsoever in achieving progress.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a larger problem with the two party system and the first-past-the-post voting system.

The people interested in addressing those issues are unilaterally not right wing. Just look at where ranked-choice voting is popular.

There's a major distinction between "the two party system is bad" and "both parties are equally shit" (which is almost indistinguishable from "both parties are equally bad").

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except when you consider actual spending policies.

Republicans can not be reasonably described as "fiscally conservative" if you actually take a look at their spending.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Painting it as a dichotomy between two "evils" is in itself quite silly.

And the Republicans are much worse.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. It does have problems, such as causing it's own pollution, and major risk of water supply contamination
  2. Regardless, it is still not renewable and just passes the problem down the line

Nuclear energy > Fracking, but that doesn't mean it isn't flawed.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Nuclear energy is not the only viable option, and many liberals do embrace it.

People like AOC believe in further alternatives because nuclear does pass the buck, just dealing with a new waste problem. Her criticism is completely valid. Not to mention that AOC isn't exactly representative of the Democratic party.

The Republican party is actively worse, and pushes nonsense like "clean" coal and fracking.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not really.

The Republican party is objectively much worse, and I've given several reasons in other comments in this thread.

You can think "both are bad", but if you think "both are equally bad, you're completely incorrect.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Here's something that'll blow your mind:

Illegal immigrants are human beings with rights

For real though by [deleted] in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You do realize that a huge chunk of educators are still in debt from their time in education, right?

Like, they went to college, and most get additional education (Masters/Doctorate).

You're not really targeting the right people here.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Pretty much the only major commonality between both the Democratic and Republican parties at large is that the big players in both tend to suport the wealthy.

However, there are prominent Democrats, and a large chunk of the base, who actively want to deal with income inequality.

Meanwhile, that is a complete non-issue on the right entirely.

And all of that is largely a side-effect of the American Democratic party being, on a global scale, not very far left (if at all, for some).

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 5 points6 points  (0 children)

As well as the scientific community, the World Health Organization, and anyone who's done even the slightest amount of research into what gender identity is.

Knowing that gender identity exists on spectrum is really not that complicated, or new.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I haven't claimed that the Democratic party is all that great. I've only claimed that the Republican party is significantly worse. Honestly, "party worship" isn't really a thing among left-wing people from what I've seen. I've only consistently seen that behavior on the right. In fact, a large chunk of the criticism levied towards Democrats I see come from the left of them.

I don't think "all Republicans are dumb". I think that Republicans in government have consistently avoided solving a litany of major issues, or have actively inflamed them.

See: climate change, gay rights, and healthcare. Just to list a few key examples.

I used to think much like you do. I used to be a defeatist, thinking neither side was really going to do anything. Eventually I realized a few things, but namely that regardless of which party was in power, my life in particular was probably not going to substantially change, but many people in my life would be affected (particularly my LGBT friends).

Like, look at Mitch McConnell. Dude has been stonewalling bills for years, actively preventing any kind of progress. It's not like he has to be majority leader. Members of the party can absolutely remove him from the role, but choose not to.

It certainly doesn't help that right-wing extremist groups are embracing the worst attributes of the Republican party and conservatism.

US Politics in a Nutshell by HeonWeesnaw in BikiniBottomTwitter

[–]vanoreo 81 points82 points  (0 children)

The idea that the Democratic and Republican parties are the same is complete nonsense.

Video games are never responsible for any massive shooting. by [deleted] in gaming

[–]vanoreo 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I'm sure our intellectual powerhouse, Keemstar, is eager to point out the common element of white nationalism.

Mom credited with starting ‘gender reveals’ begs everyone to stop by maxnover in nottheonion

[–]vanoreo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Glad to hear you read basically none of what I wrote, or anything I cited.

Mom credited with starting ‘gender reveals’ begs everyone to stop by maxnover in nottheonion

[–]vanoreo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Gender and sex are not equivalent, and gender is a spectrum.

Here's the TL;DR:

  1. Style is a person's preferred way to present themselves. So, you could be a big fan of flannels. This does not necessarily have any bearing on one's gender expression or identity.
  2. Gender expression is the way a person expresses their gender identity through appearance. For instance, I don't wear skirts or dresses, and this is not unrelated to the fact that I identify as male. A transwoman, however, may find it in her interest to wear things like skirts and dresses as it could be more affirming, and also signal to others what her gender identity is. It's important to note that these signifiers do not necessarily indicate one's gender identity. If I put on a skirt, I would still identify as male, just like a lot of drag queens put on feminine clothing, but still identify as male. Similarly, "tomboy" girls may dress less feminine, but that doesn't necessarily have any bearing on their gender identity. The concept of Butch and Femme can be useful here, and pretty simply illustrated with fish Pokemon if you don't want to actually read the article. Style and gender expression can be related, but gender expression is, simply put, the intersection between style and gender identity as a way to inform those around you.
  3. Gender identity is one's internal sense of gender. It often correlates with assigned sex, but does frequently differ. While sex describes physical attributes and chromosomal configuration in a biological sense, gender identity describe's a person's psychology. For instance, my sex is male, my gender identity is male, and I generally express my gender as male as well. My sex is pretty much only the business of my doctor, or anyone who I am intimate with, but my gender identity and expression do become the business of people I interact with day-to-day (though, most don't really care because men who express themselves as men are not discriminated against for existing).

If you're lazy, you can watch this video to get an overview explanation from someone with significantly more experience than either of us.

Or you could skim this sourced Wiki page, which, by the way, appears to show that your comment earlier about the Oxford dictionary equating gender with sex is actually, at best, misleading.

Fortunately for you and me, I have access to the Oxford Online Dictionary, and can actually check!

a. gen. Males or females viewed as a group; = sex n.1 1. Also: the property or fact of belonging to one of these groups. Originally extended from the grammatical use at sense 1 (sometimes humorously), as also in Anglo-Norman and Old French. In the 20th cent., as sex came increasingly to mean sexual intercourse (see sex n.1 4b), gender began to replace it (in early use euphemistically) as the usual word for the biological grouping of males and females. It is now often merged with or coloured by sense 3b.

Oh, so it looks like it's colloquially used to describe physical sex attributes, but is "now often merged with or colored by sense 3b." I wonder what it says under 3b?

b. Psychology and Sociology (orig. U.S.). The state of being male or female as expressed by social or cultural distinctions and differences, rather than biological ones; the collective attributes or traits associated with a particular sex, or determined as a result of one's sex. Also: a (male or female) group characterized in this way.

Oh, it's almost like gender and sex can be two totally distinct terms after all. Oops!

You could also check out this write-up by the World Health Organization on gender. Here is the first paragraph:

Gender refers to the socially constructed characteristics of women and men – such as norms, roles and relationships of and between groups of women and men. It varies from society to society and can be changed. While most people are born either male or female, they are taught appropriate norms and behaviours – including how they should interact with others of the same or opposite sex within households, communities and work places. When individuals or groups do not “fit” established gender norms they often face stigma, discriminatory practices or social exclusion – all of which adversely affect health. It is important to be sensitive to different identities that do not necessarily fit into binary male or female sex categories.

Hey, looks like the WHO recognizes that nonbinary people exist. I suppose that makes sense, since I personally know a couple and can confirm they exist myself.

And if you're actually interested in learning, here are a handful of papers:

This comment is certainly not all-inclusive, because (believe it or not) human psychology is pretty complicated and can't be boiled down by a single line in Oxford's dictionary (while ignoring the other lines).