Misgendering is a thing even outside of trans people. Everyone has met someone who they were unsure of gender and many may have addressed a person as sir who is really a madam or vice versa, usually to the embarrassment of both parties. Or telling a parent they have a beautiful baby girl/boy when it is actually the opposite. Mostly it is innocent mistakes (where embarassment is punishment enough), sometimes it is malicious. How do we deal with the malevolent jerks? It is a form of dehumanization, not all that dissimilar to referring to an ethnic group as 'vermin'. Dehumanization is the first step to violence. Like our GOP friend in Texas who said that the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat. Whether or not it is/should be illegal, it is wrong and it is disgusting.
What do you mean by simply disagree? Insisting on calling a trans man 'she/her'? That is not merely a polite disagreement anymore than the term 'Libtard', 'deplorable' etc. It is explicitly hostile. Would it not be dehumanizing for me to start referring to Trump as 'the vermin'?
You can simply disagree that a trans man is exactly the same as a cis man. I happen to believe share that disagreement.
What do you mean by simply disagree? Insisting on calling a trans man 'she/her'? That is not merely a polite disagreement anymore than the term 'Libtard', 'deplorable' etc. It is explicitly hostile. Would it not be dehumanizing for me to start referring to Trump as 'the vermin'?
You can simply disagree that a trans man is exactly the same as a cis man. I happen to believe share that disagreement.
What do you mean by simply disagree? Insisting on calling a trans man 'she/her'? That is not merely a polite disagreement anymore than the term 'Libtard', 'deplorable' etc. It is explicitly hostile. Would it not be dehumanizing for me to start referring to Trump as 'the vermin'?
You can simply disagree that a trans man is exactly the same as a cis man. I happen to believe share that disagreement.
If you're female, and I refer to you as she, that should not be a crime.
It might be rude or antagonistic, but it isn't dehumanizing.
He, she, it, they, Xe, Xer, are all arguably "human appropriate" terms.
Calling Trump vermin, while arguably an accurate description in some contexts, is dehumanizing, as vermin, BY DEFINITION is not human.
The point is, that some "Conservatives" are persecuted for their beliefs.
I would also tend to use the socially polite pronouns, I have nothing against trans people, however in a free society, I should have the right to be rude, on purpose or by accident.
You're conflating whether something is dehumanizing and whether it is/ought to be illegal. I don't think it should be illegal, but I don't think it should be protected either. You are free to be an *** and to receive all social punishments due as a result (loss of employment, etc.). Racists are free to think racist thoughts, but if they start using racial slurs at work, they shouldn't be surprised to find themselves summarily fired.
I think the so called 'climate change' has the cause and effect relationship between co2 and warming backwards. Many articles pt to a poor correlation between co2 levels and warming. In the early 20th century the climate warmed while c02 levels were relatively low. Then after 1940 in the post war industrial period, co2 levels were rising but there was a 30 yr cooling period in fact.
The only time c02 and temp rose together was really from 1980 onward. Recently since the 1997/1998 actually there has been on a cooling trend yet co2 levels are now over 400ppm and their highest ever
In fact warming oceans release much more c02 than man made sources.
Raising the temperature of the ocean one degree reduces the solubility of CO2 in the ocean by about 4% (Solubility of Gases in Water) This releases about 1440 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere. This release would roughly triple the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
That could explain the recent rise in co2 after el nino to the now record levels. Yet the temperature anomaly has been declining ever since. So it appears warming is causing the c02 increase and not the other way around as the alarmists and politicians like to claim. This is also supported through history where there would be temperature increases followed by a co2 increase after a 9 month lag.
To say that there has been a cooling trend since 1997 is deliberate misreading of the data. That year was an exceptionally hot year, essentially an outlier on the continuing upward trend. The second chart you posted makes that clear.
If atmospheric CO2 concentration tripled, that would put it into the range that has direct adverse impacts on human health (feeling unwell/fatigued). That should be very concerning!
That could explain the recent rise in co2 after el nino to the now record levels. Yet the temperature anomaly has been declining ever since. So it appears warming is causing the c02 increase and not the other way around as the alarmists and politicians like to claim. This is also supported through history where there would be temperature increases followed by a co2 increase after a 9 month lag.
That just makes it a positive feedback loop. That warming causes CO2 to be released from solution in the ocean does not mean that COs does not cause warming. Positive feedback loops are dangerous and unstable. It is nuts to say that CO2 does not have a warming effect--that can trivially be demonstrated in a lab.
To say that there has been a cooling trend since 1997 is deliberate misreading of the data. That year was an exceptionally hot year, essentially an outlier on the continuing upward trend. The second chart you posted makes that clear.
That just makes it a positive feedback loop. That warming causes CO2 to be released from solution in the ocean does not mean that COs does not cause warming. Positive feedback loops are dangerous and unstable. It is nuts to say that CO2 does not have a warming effect--that can trivially be demonstrated in a lab.
It is clear warming came first then the c02. You can see too warming and co2 have little correaltion. Most of greenhouse warming in fact is from h2o C02 is a small % of the green house effect
If atmospheric CO2 concentration tripled, that would put it into the range that has direct adverse impacts on human health (feeling unwell/fatigued). That should be very concerning!
The pt is water vapor is a larger part of the atmosphere. So they should be more worried about it then c02. The warming appears to come first though then the c02
This is a very interesting interview with George Gao, director-general of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (PhD from Oxford!)
Not wearing masks to protect against coronavirus is a ‘big mistake,’ top Chinese scientist says
Not just about masks, but about how the...
I am a Canadian citizen by birth and a life long resident of Canada. I can obtain UK citizenship by descent from my mother, who was born in England. (Cost about 160 C$) I know that the UK is no longer part of the EU so it would not help with EU travel, but are there any negatives (cons) to me...
Not really sure where to put this, but here is an interesting article about the two companies. Coincidently or not so coincidently, when one was falling, the other was rising.
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/did-a-chinese-hack-kill-canada-s-greatest-tech-company-1.1459269
Not that the Nortel wasn't...
You may or may not have noticed that now that we are starting to get Covid under control, nothing has been said by the Ontario government (or any other provincial government that I am aware of) as to how we are going to overhaul our Long Term Care system. It's back to 'ignore the elderly'.
Now...
A forum community dedicated to Canadian personal finance enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about investing, stock portfolios, equities, frugality, real estate, market trading, taxation, retirement, and more!
en.wikipedia.org
sags · updated 
Longtimeago · updated 
