Tomboys and transgenderism

Moderators: I am nobody, Deku Tree

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 29852
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A
Has thanked: 1844 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#21

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Oct 14, 2019 11:25 pm

RinkuTheFirst wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 11:08 pm
I REALLY HATE POKEMON! wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:45 am
It's probably still a more reliable source than CNN.
Statements like this make it difficult to take anything you say seriously.
Project Veritas ring a bell? They're exposing what everyone already knew. I think I'll actually make a topic about that situation because it's pretty cool.

User avatar
Apollo the Just
Moderator
Posts: 15709
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Piccolo is Gohan's Real Dad
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 593 times
Contact:

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#22

Post by Apollo the Just » Mon Oct 14, 2019 11:34 pm

CNN has done some dumb **** like when they pushed the "JOKER IS GOING TO CAUSE A MASS SHOOTING GUYS!!!" headline because i guess they were disappointed it wasn't causing a mass shooting and maybe other things are to blame for this country's gun violence epidemic. and yet, they are FAR and away more trustworthy than a **** tabloid. it's good to be critical of news sources, but it's best to apply that criticism to ALL sources, whether they are on ""your side"" or not.

CNN's also got money in politics issues but you can definitely do worse. they are genuinely a source of actual facts more often than plenty of sources i see thrown around.

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 29852
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A
Has thanked: 1844 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#23

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Tue Oct 15, 2019 1:29 am

Apollo the Just wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 11:34 pm
CNN has done some dumb **** like when they pushed the "JOKER IS GOING TO CAUSE A MASS SHOOTING GUYS!!!" headline because i guess they were disappointed it wasn't causing a mass shooting and maybe other things are to blame for this country's gun violence epidemic. and yet, they are FAR and away more trustworthy than a **** tabloid. it's good to be critical of news sources, but it's best to apply that criticism to ALL sources, whether they are on ""your side"" or not.

CNN's also got money in politics issues but you can definitely do worse. they are genuinely a source of actual facts more often than plenty of sources i see thrown around.
You're definitely right that it's good to be critical of all news sources. I don't think they're credible enough to be deemed a "source of facts" though, I mean you can get the weather and sports from them, but if there's anything political or social, beware. They perpetuated the Russia hoax, defend Antifa, are a general Trump impeachment propaganda machine, went with the false narrative against the Covington High School students, etc.

There's another topic I am going to make for this subject as I think it's important enough to warrant its own thing, but I wanted to respond to you here because you took the time to make a post, and you made some good points.

User avatar
smol Kat
Posts: 10951
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: a s s i m i l a t e
Has thanked: 634 times
Been thanked: 294 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#24

Post by smol Kat » Tue Oct 15, 2019 4:21 pm

I REALLY HATE POKEMON! wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 1:29 am
You're definitely right that it's good to be critical of all news sources. I don't think they're credible enough to be deemed a "source of facts" though, I mean you can get the weather and sports from them, but if there's anything political or social, beware.
Yes but this is true of news sources on all sides, and we'd like you to acknowledge that. Nobody in this thread is defending CNN, lol.
looking up into pure sunlight

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 29852
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A
Has thanked: 1844 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#25

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:56 am

smol Kat wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 4:21 pm
I REALLY HATE POKEMON! wrote:
Tue Oct 15, 2019 1:29 am
You're definitely right that it's good to be critical of all news sources. I don't think they're credible enough to be deemed a "source of facts" though, I mean you can get the weather and sports from them, but if there's anything political or social, beware.
Yes but this is true of news sources on all sides, and we'd like you to acknowledge that. Nobody in this thread is defending CNN, lol.
Of course, but I did though, in the very first sentence you quoted. I just think CNN is especially bad and gets much more credit than is due. I may have a preference for certain sites, like Fox News, but I'm not beyond criticizing them. One particularly bad report by them was regarding "Soph," the popular conservative YouTube comedian who was banned from that site. She was edgy and her comedy was offensive, the delivery of her opinions were obviously designed to be as controversial as possible, but Fox News didn't fairly cover her banning. They said she "seemed to call for violence" and uploaded "anti-Muslim" content, neither of which are true. It also stated that she referenced "a range of false or discredited information" but didn't seem to back up that claim.

Then there were Fox News hosts saying ignorant things about video games as they related to violence. For instance, Laura Ingraham referred to video games as "simulated violence," which is extremely inaccurate. There's lots of little things like this which can add up, but I don't think any of it is at the level where someone would need to just completely avoid Fox News, but I'd suggest to do so with CNN. They actively seek to deceive viewers, I don't think Fox News does, and there's evidence that they do.
Last edited by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! on Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
smol Kat
Posts: 10951
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: a s s i m i l a t e
Has thanked: 634 times
Been thanked: 294 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#26

Post by smol Kat » Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:47 am

Thanks for your response. For the record the main thing that I disagree with in what you said is that I /do/ feel both fox and CNN should be avoided; there are so many better sources out there, regardless of one's political views. But I'm glad that you are recognizing the problems with sources that do align with your views.
looking up into pure sunlight

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 29852
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A
Has thanked: 1844 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#27

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Wed Oct 16, 2019 9:16 am

That may be true about avoiding both of them in the end, regardless of which is worse. What would be considered among the more truthful and politically neutral sources?

User avatar
Deku Tree
Moderator
Posts: 12355
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Texas
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#28

Post by Deku Tree » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:42 pm

I think pretty highly of Washington Post.

User avatar
CaptHayfever
Supermod
Posts: 38143
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 1:00 am
Location: (n) - the place where I am
Has thanked: 607 times
Been thanked: 169 times
Contact:

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#29

Post by CaptHayfever » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:51 pm

Handy guideline (not 100% reliable because literally nothing is in politics, but still):
Image

The top center region contains your best options.
Both the left & right borders will be extreme bias, regardless of accuracy. The horizontal middle will be minimal bias. Not no-bias, 'cause everyone's biased, but minimal.
The bottom 1/3 is low-accuracy. The vertical middle is a mix of accurate-but-incomplete & primarily-opinion-and-interpretation. The top 1/3 is high-accuracy & low-persuasion.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

User avatar
smol Kat
Posts: 10951
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: a s s i m i l a t e
Has thanked: 634 times
Been thanked: 294 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#30

Post by smol Kat » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:52 pm

^Thanks--was going to dig that infographic up after work.
looking up into pure sunlight

User avatar
steeze
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 9:52 am
Location: Konoha
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#31

Post by steeze » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:54 pm

Wall street Journal, C-Span, Pew Research, Associated Press, Reuters, PBS. While BBC and NPR are supposed to be unbiased. There is some language that betrays some journalists as not being completely unbiased, we are all human and have our own views. Just so happens that real journalists are affected by the news they report. I will say that most if not all of these sources remain the most neutral out of all of them based on their reporting, willingness to display both sides of the coin and ability to not jump to conclusions. Their language for framing headlines and stories report mostly on factual analysis. They piss off liberals and conservatives alike.

User avatar
smol Kat
Posts: 10951
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:22 pm
Location: a s s i m i l a t e
Has thanked: 634 times
Been thanked: 294 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#32

Post by smol Kat » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:56 pm

It's more or less impossible to be totally, utterly, 100% unbiased tbh. The sources you listed come damn close though.
looking up into pure sunlight

User avatar
CaptHayfever
Supermod
Posts: 38143
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 1:00 am
Location: (n) - the place where I am
Has thanked: 607 times
Been thanked: 169 times
Contact:

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#33

Post by CaptHayfever » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:57 pm

Edited some further explanation below the graph.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

User avatar
steeze
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 9:52 am
Location: Konoha
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#34

Post by steeze » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:01 pm

Deku Tree wrote:
Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:42 pm
I think pretty highly of Washington Post.
I would hesitate to include the Washington Post in a list of unbiased journalism. The only reason they are up so high on that list is because while they do betray a bias their reporting does include sources and facts that back up their bias which can't really be disproved outright.

User avatar
I am nobody
Moderator
Posts: 13403
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:26 pm
Location: -89.97814998,-42.2333493
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 221 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#35

Post by I am nobody » Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:12 pm

WSJ's reporting isn't particularly biased, but their editorial page, at least last I read it (before Trump), is consistently quite conservative and openly pro-GOP.

Unbiased sources aren't the goal, IMO, because the only ways to be effectively unbiased are to either state exactly what happened with no context or to painstakingly provide all the context. The first doesn't give you enough depth to form a meaningful opinion, and the second doesn't give you enough breadth to participate in more than a handful of issues. I think you get the most out of reading sources at the complex analysis level on that chart while being aware of how they skew, and making an effort to read critical responses to your sources where possible.

User avatar
I am nobody
Moderator
Posts: 13403
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:26 pm
Location: -89.97814998,-42.2333493
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 221 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#36

Post by I am nobody » Sun Oct 20, 2019 7:12 am

Related: Here's a site that has a huge list of sources on a left/right axis and some extra axes of craziness for conspiracy sites. A quick check of a handful of sources I'm familiar with all made sense and were well-justified.

User avatar
ScottyMcGee
Posts: 5570
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: New Jersey
Has thanked: 200 times
Been thanked: 161 times
Contact:

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#37

Post by ScottyMcGee » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:41 pm

Asking which news media outlet is the best is like asking which of these pieces of poop implies you're healthy. There's a clear answer but at the end of the day you're still looking at poop.

As a general rule - the more boring it sounds, the more truthful it is.

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 29852
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A
Has thanked: 1844 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#38

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:03 am

I don't want to make an entirely new topic for a somewhat similar/related one, but I want to discuss these perspectives and express my opinions of them without clogging the forum up, so I'm posting this here. Maybe this topic should just be renamed to something like "Gender Discussion" perhaps.

Anyway, for the last couple years I've been noticing a type of push for an erasure of (or denial of the existence of) heterosexuality, or at least a warping of what it means. Articles saying things like "Heterosexuality isn't real/natural/is a manufactured concept", "heterosexuality isn't working," and such notions, these are baffling. More dangerously, the notion that it's actually "phobic" for someone to only have interest in people of the opposite gender (or chromosomes, whatever). I first became aware of the existence of such a perspective when Tucker Carlson pointed out some activists with those ideas, but I've stumbled across it more since then. Take this for example; this person perfectly encapsulates everything I'm talking about. And sure, it might just be multiple people and maybe not an organized agenda, right? But it's still frighteningly prevalent, in that it's not just a couple fringe extremists with these concerning views, they're definitely not mainstream but I don't see opposition to them, certainly on the left or LGBT people condemning it.

I don't want to label it "heterophobia," I feel there'd be a great irony there since I think the word "homophobia" is ridiculous. It's certainly something though, isn't it? Almost seems like there's a type of revenge going on against heterosexuals, "Aha, you guys said homosexuality wasn't natural and now we're going to say heterosexuality isn't natural because we're mainstream™ now" or something, idk.

What do you guys think of these articles, do you think these people's logic is correct? I'm particularly interested in what you think about that person's input from Quora that I linked to. A couple more links so similar stuff (I can't find the Carlson video I mentioned):

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontlin ... story.html

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2017 ... osexuality

https://www.quora.com/Am-I-transphobic- ... e-at-birth

User avatar
CaptHayfever
Supermod
Posts: 38143
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 1:00 am
Location: (n) - the place where I am
Has thanked: 607 times
Been thanked: 169 times
Contact:

Re: Tomboys and transgenderism

#39

Post by CaptHayfever » Sun Dec 15, 2019 2:42 pm

First link: The thing to keep in mind about Medium is that literally anybody can publish to it with basically no oversight. Usually, when somebody on Medium pulls some stunt like this author did (redefining "heterosexuality"--and every other sexual orientation, see quote below--to mean "a system" instead of an actual sexual orientation), the comments--including those from LGBTQ people--are quick to call them out on their crap. This article, however, has disabled comments.
It’s not women and men having sex. It is an aggregate of beliefs, norms, attitudes and practices. The same is true for homosexuality. It would also be true for other sexual orientations, although they might not have as much impact society-wide if they’re less common.
Seriously, if you told a bi person that their attraction is just a "belief" & didn't disable their means to respond, they'd tell you to shove it.

Second link: You lost me at "Miley Cyrus".

Quora link: That is a discussion. Several of the answers disagree.

I don't have time to read through the PBS/BBC articles at the moment; I'll check them out later.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

Post Reply

Return to “Politics, Philosophy, and Religion”