en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/2454827 Comments by BothHotPockets http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/11/transgendered-complications/#IDComment143213584 I must say, I was pretty surprised when I read this article, actually. Not because of the discrimination that this poor man had directed at him, but at how far the gender identity and expression movement has come. I know, it may not sound like it from this article, but it seems like the movement has gained a little ground. First of all, the fact that this man was able to change his license and birth certificate is a wonder, assuming that in the past, this must have been very difficult, and probably impossible in most cases. Also, the fact that 12 states ban gender status discrimination in their discrimination laws is also a decent leap. I remember watching Boys Don’t Cry for the first time and just thinking how fucked up it was that this could happen to anyone. I am glad to see the strides that have been taken (especially when I thought that none had been taken at all), but it is still sad to see this happen to anyone. It is complete bull that Mr. Devoureau was asked, point bland, whether he had had a sex change. That is completely unethical and also not allowed in New Jersey. Secondly, I think if anyone knows what a penis looks like, it is probably this guy. You want one your whole life and I’m sure you’re going to know everything about it. I’m not really sure what is about this individual that makes him unsuitable for him to watch people pee into a cup? Odds are, this man probably likes women. Odds are, he is thinking perverted about what he is seeing. Odds are, women could probably do this job if they wanted to. If a woman, or a man, wants to watch me pee into a cup, more power to them. In this country today, when we have Americans that don’t even want to do some of the most basic jobs that occur in this country, I say Mr. D should be allowed to continue this job, one which is probably undesirable to a large portion of the population. Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:40:32 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/11/transgendered-complications/#IDComment143213584 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/07/4827/#IDComment141080803 This article just scrambled my brains. I have too much to say, but it’s all hitting my fingers at once, so I will do my best to filter out what needs to be said and what does not. First of all, oil and gas companies definitely do NOT need the subsidies that are being provided to them. An industry that has grossed well over one TRILLION dollars in the last decade needs absolutely no help from the national government. Actually, I’d be interested in learning how other nations tax or subsidize the oil and gas industry, but that’s beside the point. Jobs most certainly will not be lost if we remove these subsidies, nor will gas prices see a rise. If anything, jobs will be CREATED. The way I see it, the industry will just hire more lobbyists and send then crawling into Washington to do their bidding. So really, the nation stands to gain from this, in more ways than one. We should most definitely use the tax breaks and subsidies that are given to oil and gas and bestow then onto solar, hydroelectric, wind, and nuclear energies, which do far lss damage to the community (pay no attention to that nuclear part..) and would be used to move this country away from the dangerous dependence we have on foreign oil. Also, that part about the polls is complete bullshit. I mean, the wording from the part of the oil companies ("Do you support or oppose increased taxes on America's oil and natural gas industry?") is completely inaccurate to the matter at hand. We wouldn’t be taxing them more, we would be taking away the money we give to them already, the exact OPPOSITE of taxes, known to the layman as subsidies. But I do think we should tax those assholes, anyway. Oh lord, and I haven’t even touched on the political aspects of this. I think it’s completely shameful that politicians would support holding up oil companies, or at the very least, try to derail those trying to take the subsidies away. I think any politician who sides with the oil and gas industries, Republican or Democrat, should be booted out of office. It is completely irresponsible to take the side of huge corporations instead of the American people. It’s not surprising, though, that the industry has managed to worm its way into our political system. Sadly, this is what I have come to expect from our national government. Way to keep my faith, America. Fri, 8 Apr 2011 20:23:31 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/07/4827/#IDComment141080803 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/30/so-what-your-take-on-those-inequality-classes/#IDComment139263221 Let me first say, I’m a big fan of your work. But yes, very interesting lectures on something I had already looked into a little bit, you definitely expanded a lot of my knowledge on this subject. It’s something we see throughout history, that the wealthy are always the ones pulling the strings (invisible, of course), and that little can be done to derail this. I feel as though most Americans are not aware of this, however, and I believe you feel the same way. I mean, the chart you showed about what Americans believe the actual wealth distribution is compared to what it actually is says it all. We have no options! The two party system allows us to pick from “rich” and “richer”. The fact that there is a two party system in the first place is evidence that we do not realize the power that the wealthy have. The parties have routinely controlled who gets in, who gets out, and what third parties may run against them. Elections are fueled by the money of the wealthy in order to favor their interests. Everything is wrong with this. And what do we (not really we, more like they, because really they make all the decisions) do to alleviate it, even it out? We LOWER the tax rate for the rich. I’m sorry, but a flat tax has to be one of the most asinine ideas ever to come out of conservatives. If you can afford a fancy mansion, more cars than most people have family members, and $10,000 plate dinners, you can certainly afford to give a little bit more, proportionally, of your money to this apparently bankrupt government than Hobo Harry from Toledo. They already have everything, but apparently that just isn’t enough. Well, I’ll get off of my soap box now, but Sam, I thoroughly enjoyed the lecture. Definitely make sure you do these for the next Soc 001 class, I think it is something that every American should be aware of, and I think it is something that we should all try to do something about. Sat, 2 Apr 2011 02:07:27 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/30/so-what-your-take-on-those-inequality-classes/#IDComment139263221 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/religion-in-the-future/#IDComment137621513 I have to say, this isn’t exactly surprising. I saw somewhere a while ago that in two of the world’s largest countries, China and Russia, religion was already pretty much driven out by the communist regimes that resided and still do reside there. I guess when it comes down to it, religion just isn’t as needed, or even as prevalent as it was centuries or decades ago. A big part of it has to do with the countries in which this pattern is being observed. All are western, all are modernized, and all have a generation of young people coming to the forefront that are more highly educated and less religious than the generation before them, not that having a faith requires one to NOT have a degree. I don’t think, however, that the distinction of these countries not having a majority of religious individuals makes a difference. By and large, these are countries with little recent trouble regarding religious upheaval or sectarian violence. Really, these countries will have pretty much the same societies when religion does dissolve as they do know. The fact is, religion plays a very minor role in the everyday practices and customs of the people of these nations. I was thinking about this, and that is really the key to a loss of religion, how much a religion is integrated into ones everyday experiences. Take the Middle East (no really, take her!). In many parts of the Middle East, Islam is the foundation of so many of the day’s activities. Until those nations modernize, and basically westernize, religion won’t be going anywhere. And whereas religion has brought many good things to the world, the presence of many religions has caused great violence, on occasion. Catholics and Protestants, Sunni and Shiite, tribal warfare, all sorts of clashes have happened as a result of religion. Although I am not religious, I see many of the benefits in being religious, and I almost hate to see it go, worldwide. Also, I hate to tack this on, but the whole thing about doing what your friends do it ridiculous. Sat, 26 Mar 2011 02:50:54 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/religion-in-the-future/#IDComment137621513 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/21/rethinking-education/#IDComment130707232 As an education major, I am VERY glad we are talking about this subject, it is close to my heart. It is also coincidental that we are talking this. Yesterday in my Anthropology class, the professor went on a rant about memorization and learning. She said that she is tired of hearing about all of this “abstract thinking” and “divergence” and the like. She praised rote memorization, saying that we cannot expect to know things unless we know facts. I just sat there, astounded. This from a woman who makes her class memorize the dates, geographical ranges, exact, and I do mean EXACT, scientific names, and cranial capacities of every distinct species within the human lineage. This is all well and good, but I don’t think I’m learning anything new about evolution, or about how we came to be. I’m just seeing signposts, not the road I’m on. I can’t even pay attention in that class, for fear that I’ll miss any of the densely packed eighty plus slides that she shows each class. God knows they aren’t on ANGEL. I absolutely believe in divergent thinking and all that jazz. Why should I be made to memorize random and vague facts and figures? How do these things make me a more functional human being. I know that ninety percent of all extinctions caused by mankind have been birds, but when is that going to land me that teaching job at the local high school? The simple answer is that it won’t. Definitely to some extent, we need to know “bits”, if you will, of information. Learning about the birth of America is something every American should know about, and there are various multiple coice-esque “bits” that go into that. However, I feel like little is being done to connect these “bits” into a cohesive, comprehensive web. What we typically get isfact after fact, lecture after lecture, homework assignment after homework assignment of “bits”, but no analysis. Here’s a model plane kit, but you don’t get any glue to hold the pieces together. What are you going to do with those pieces? Throw them away, of course. They are of absolutely no use to you, they are taking up space, when so many more valuable things could be occupying it. Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:02:54 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/21/rethinking-education/#IDComment130707232 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/30/conformity-rules-the-day/#IDComment125996138 As much as we don’t like to admit it, as much as we all want to think we’re truly individual, I think we all know that this isn’t true. I like to think that I am different from most people, and while I may not be the same as anyone, I am certainly not completely different than anyone. It is part of our conditioning, really. From the day we start learning about the world we are taught that we are supposed to fit into it like a puzzle piece, disturbing nothing, upsetting no one, and always belonging. This is completely logical to teach a child. Who wants a kid that sticks out like a sore thumb? To be a “functioning member of society”, to make the best lives we can, we need to be successful, and to be successful we need to be just like those who were successful before us. So nothing changes. It’s evolution. We emulate those that we want to be, and eventually everyone (or at least most people) is the same. Every now and then someone different comes along and flips the script, does something no one has ever seen before, and just like survival enhancing traits, become imbedded in the gene pool. It’s not something I’m going to fight. I’m not going to say we should all disregard what others think and go live in the woods. Conformity IS evolution. Think of where we would be if we weren’t social animals. Probably still on the savannahs in Africa. With sociability comes conformity, it’s only natural. Not conforming gets you locked up. Conforming is what gives us all a semi-common experience, and with that semi-common experience comes theory of mind, or the ability to think about what another individual is thinking. Without theory of mind, we are confused, and humanity as we know it would seem far flung. Where conformity becomes a problem is when groupthink and mob mentality situations come about. I think one must always be present one’s individuality, but not be afraid to be like someone else or act like someone else. At all times we are in a social tug-of-war. Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:39:30 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/30/conformity-rules-the-day/#IDComment125996138 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/27/americans-gone-wild/#IDComment124463018 People can bitch about taxes all they want, but I’m sure the same people that support rock bottom taxes are the same people that defend bringing this tot into custody. Look, take my money for useful things, not the salary of a policeman who was sitting at his desk, doing nothing, until the call came in to book this pre-school perp. It’s common sense that tells someone that a five year old probably has no concept of murder, revenge, “terroristic threats”, or anything like it. I’m sorry, call me a liberal (as if that’s a bad thing), but I think a handgun ban is just what this country needs. If it had been a hunting rifle in the back of that dad’s vehicle, you can be damn sure little Johnny will not be bringing it into school in his pocket. I’m not going to get into the nitty-gritty of the second amendment (Though it does clearly state “A well regulated Militia”, which basically means you can only have a gun if you’re in the National Guard; funny how we seem to miss that part), but it just doesn’t make sense to compound this nations alarmingly high prison population problem by sticking with the “I need this gun for self-defense” credo. Violence only begets more violence, and just because you have decided to use that pistol for self-defense doesn’t mean neighbor Ted or those hooligans from down the street will use it for the same reason. Why am I paying the national government to enforce ridiculously harsh drug laws when what I could be paying them to do is pay them to keep these dangerous guns out of this country? If neighbor Ted wants to smoke dope, snort coke, do smack, recline in an opium den, shoot heroine, or any other “verb drug” combination, it isn’t hurting me one bit. On the other hand, if neighbor Ted decides that humans are a plague destroying the planet and decides to go on a shooting spree, that DOES hurt me. Me thinks conservatives need to reevaluate their comprehension of this issue. Not to mention what the effect on this kid will be after all this negative attention. Sat, 29 Jan 2011 03:09:19 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/27/americans-gone-wild/#IDComment124463018 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/04/21/letter-from-an-inmate/#IDComment122907795 It is so interesting to even consider putting myself in the shoes of a prisoner. I mean, it would humble anyone to be incarcerated, or at least there is a capacity to. But it is interesting. I often consider myself to be pretty empathetic. Whenever someone feels sad, happy, angry, anything, I can feel it. Or at least I like to think that I can. But no matter how much I like to think I can, I can honestly say that I've never had that one to one completely solid connection to another human being. Let's say someone I know has had a death in the family. I can come up to them, say There's nothing I can say, but I'm here for you, and let's say I start to cry. No matter how shitty I feel, I know that I don't feel one-tenth of one percent as shitty as the friend. That's the thing though. I don't have to feel like somebody to help somebody. I don't even have to like somebody to help somebody. As humans, we have the ability to comfort, to save, with a touch on the shoulder and some kind words to our fellow man. Unfortunately, however, I do not feel that most Americans, or even most people in general, understand what such simple gestures mean, or what they are capable of. Why is it that it takes being locked up to see this? Is it because one has so much time to think while behind bars? Is it because the possibly violent acts that the inmates undertook to get into prison caused enough remorse to jar them from being anti-social to incredibly empathetic? Only the prisoners know. I think if we were better able to understand each other, better able to see into each other, America would not have this prison population problem. Unjust laws would be relaxed or eliminated altogether, violent crime would plummet, and so many of society's ills could be completely eradicated. Maybe we should all be lifers. Maybe we all need something drastic in order to see how important the rest of us are. Sat, 22 Jan 2011 03:19:42 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/04/21/letter-from-an-inmate/#IDComment122907795 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cc%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment122851854 Soc 001 Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:34:29 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cc%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment122851854