ThreePointTakedown

Red is my response. No other edits were made. First off...I never took anything personal(where could I have gotten that idea?)...not sure why you always feel like that is what is happening?? I was using myself(there it is) as an example to make the point, which many others have continually tried to make and you just brush over(speaking of brushing over), and that is, people who don't have the resources can get the resources by doing things for themself in order to achieve them. I don’t disagree. But here’s a scenario: you’re a poor child, parents can’t provide you with proper nutrition, what is a higher priority school or food? Another: if you have no models of best practices(and lets just define that as ANYTHING YOU THINK WILL HELP IMPROVE THEIR LIVES IN A MEANINGFUL WAY) in their family/neighborhood, where and how should they look for better influences? Where to get the resources to take advantage of those resources? Point is, there are people in situations that cannot possibly concentrate on the things you feel(privilege) are the right or best things to help them out of their situation. Your situations are different. You see it as me making an excuse. Your situation sucked and not answering the question of wanting others to have to go through what you did, I’ll answer it for you… no you wouldn’t. Because you know how hard it was and don’t want anyone let alone a child to have to go through that if at all possible. Funny part is I KNEW you were going to throw out the word "privilege" eventually. I actually started to address that proactively in my previous post, but decided to let you bring it up...so predictable. I wonder when people like you who find the boogey man in everything, think everyone is a victim (except white heterosexual men), think people don't and shouldn't have or take responsibility to their situation(again, I was talking about children, they should take responsibility for their situation? If you really believe that you are sadder and more angry than I realized) and to do something about it. There is always something or someone to blame for it(describe in detail who I am blaming and for what?). Claiming privilege is a copout in my opinion(again, you lost the thread and the point, privilege can be a passive thing that you have someone else does not, simply because of their circumstances, if you want to have a convo about it, I’d be up for that, or you could read a book about any opinion opposite of your own. I can see that’s probably a long shot). Not because I don't understand(you don’t) or have empathy(you don’t), but it does no one any good using terms like that(or have you been conditioned to see them as evil or wrong and so have this quite emotional response. Because a rational person could handle these concepts and understand how they impact everything and everyone in a society. A society that favors certain characteristics of things/people over others) including the people you think you are trying to "fight for"(I think you don’t like the people I fight for and your solution is tant amount to punishing them to do things EXACTLY how you did them, which could charitably be considered abuse or neglect. So again, sorry for your childhood). Why make excuses(new understanding of group dynamics and psychology might frighten you but these things are real and have tangible effects, again, happy to talk to you about them if you’d like) for them versus empower them and telling them they can get out of the "cycle"(question, which do you think would’ve worked better, ‘empowering’ slaves to improve their lives or ‘enforce’ equal rights/treatment and change the system that keeps them in the cycle? You probably won’t answer but its ‘enforce’) ?? Or is it easier to bring out how crappy slavery was, oppression was, etc., in the past(we both agree it was bad, right?... Right?)? I personally think that does nothing for people other than allow them an excuse to not help themselves and to blame someone(does this mean we cannot help anyone, can’t teach anyone to fish, they have to figure it out themselves?). This isn't the 40's/50's any longer. We have made GREAT progress in regard to equality(are you sure, poverty rates by demographics are pretty skewed, generational wealth gap W vs B is quite substantial) and access to resources no matter where you happen to be born(HERE IT IS! THIS SENTENCES IS WHERE YOU HAVE IT WRONG, sorry for yelling but wanted to make sure I had your attention, probably not at this point. Access. To. Resources. Is. NOT. EQUAL! That you don’t know that or won’t admit it IS. YOUR. PRIVILEGE. SHOWING. ITS. ASS!). I have a feeling you are too young to have any sort of perspective other than what you read in liberal literature and what you hear at the whacky liberal education institution you work. You are probably basing it off of what 25 years on earth? Maybe start listening to people that have been here 50+ years and have seen how much progress has been made?? I’m sorry your upbringing informed you that your ‘normal’ was ideal or sought after as a useful way to raise a child, children, or how to grow a healthy society. Plain and simple. It isn’t! You shouldn’t have been put in that position and I hope you wouldn’t want anyone else to struggle the way you did if you could help. The way you, I, and most of us was not ideal for healthy people in society. Some of us have figured that out and are working to correct our misapprehensions. So as not to pass them on to the next generation. By the way I have nothing against education jobs or the people who work in them...(your last comment does not seem to back that up) I think most of them are amazing human beings...as long as they don't bring their political agenda into the classroom and try to brainwash the kids. Heck, my kid tells me about what some teachers say(and I’m sure you don’t keep other points of view from them or not-so-subtly influence the information they are exposed to, so as to protect them from the evils of having a different opinion as you)...good thing he is a kid that thinks for himself and always looks at all kinds of perspectives before he makes an opinion(based on our conversations and who they are modeling after, I doubt that very much, but fingers crossed)...it is sad when he tells me about some of his peers who just takes what their teacher(makes it seems that you believe you are the soul provider of ‘correct’ information or opininos. That doesn’t scream maniacal overlord at all), MSM, social media, etc. spew word for word without thinking about it themselves. Good talk.

Would this person need to know of the sport of baseball to practice and get better at it?

Funny joke. Ouch. Not sure you're seeing my point at all. And you're taking my comment as a personal attack on you. Why is that? Did I reference you specifically? No. Regulate your emotions and try to read the words without putting you and your trauma into the situation and twisting it. I'm sorry you needed to work when you should've been able to be a kid. Must've been tough in hindsight. But I imagine you felt it was just what you needed to do to get where you wanted to go? What are the pros and cons of growing up like that( I didn't, I'm interested to know)? Would you do it again given the opportunity? Would you wish that childhood on anyone else, why or why not? 3rd. Never said you or anyone else shouldn't have a chance. The scenario is getting better at elements of a sport that needs equipment. If you don't have the necessary equipment how much better could you possibly be or get? What I was trying to highlight was that people, mostly children, that do not have the exposure to things or the resources to get better at those things to improve their lives/station will, like you, have to work much harder than might've otherwise be necessary as a CHILD. So the example of already having bats, balls, gloves, and a team to practice with breaks down if you don't have those things to start with. Which is, sorry for the woke term, a privilege you don't realize you have. You probably would've turned out different had you had the privilege of not having to work for every little thing. The argument would then turn to, would your outcome be better or worse with that privilege. But you probably suffered more trauma living the way you did that could've been mitigated by having a few things that most people take for granted: baseball bat or glove to take to little league. Can't be wrong at something I never said. Do you have a bias against educational jobs or people that work them?

Just to clarify your choice of words, do you think they are having this done TO them and not making the choice themselves?

All paid off, every cent.

Did I? Nope. Was I? Nope. What I made reference to you saying is that you will believe something until it is proven to be untrue. Which as we all know is the hallmark of a deep and thorough thinker. Quite measured in their reason and intelligibility. I appealed to your relentlessly meticulous nature of reading every word of every post. Thoughtfully digesting and crafty a well reasoned response. But if you need a win so badly, because you get so few. I guess that's on me. I'll chose my words more carefully so as not to be so wildly misinterpreted as is your default setting.

Did you ask them how they would go about getting better at fielding if they didn't have a glove or better at batting if they couldn't afford a bat or how to get better at baseball if they couldn't afford to play on a team? I'm curious what their ideas would be. Your example doesn't work. Some people are born without a bat, glove, or team. You can't use accountability or pull up boot straps if you don't have boots. The suggestion that someone should look towards successful people from outside of their own immediate environment and then model that behavior in the hopes of rising to or matching their level of success, is interesting. I would love to understand your reasoning behind this hypothesis. A book to consider: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK547371/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887492/ Findings In this cohort study of 139 484 individuals, TGD people had elevated overall mortality compared with cisgender people, specifically deaths from external causes (suicides, homicides, and accidental poisonings), endocrine disorders, and other ill-defined and unspecified causes. Transfeminine individuals had a decreased cancer mortality risk compared with cisgender women but the same risk as cisgender men, whereas transmasculine individuals had the same cancer mortality risk as cisgender people. Meaning These findings highlight the need to develop interventions to prevent suicide, homicide, and accidental poisonings to reduce mortality for TGD individuals. Are you pro-life?

What point was I trying to make in your opinion? I just offered the situation and asked for someone's opinion. What are your qualms with asking someone to comment on a situation?

I guess I assumed, perhaps mistakenly, that you read the post about Sly Stallone. That was who I was referencing. If you were unaware, apparently, they have announced they're departing from California to Florida. For what reason, I cannot say.

So rather than taking your word, I asked for any examples that you had or could think of to make your point more evident. To get a better idea of what you are referring to. Because i sympathize with you if you feel I am being purposefully evasive. It is frustrating. Instead of doing that, you wrote... whatever that was. Trying to tell me that my best and only way to get clarity for something YOU WROTE, was to look inwards and identify to understand. Do you just not want to type out the answers because you think its a waste of time? I doubt it. Many of your thoughts on various subjects, recently, have been lacking in empathy and compassion. But dripping with authoritarian or dictatorial tendencies(see anthem discussion, 'just do what I would do, because I want you to'). I feel that if you really dug into your thoughts on a subject and then posted them. You'd have to come to terms with you, possibly, not being a particularly good person. Wanting those you see as unworthy, be deprived of much needed help or outright punished for situations entirely beyond their control. Or maybe I'm mistaken and you genuinely feel these things will help and lead to better and longer lasting prosperity. If that's the case, I look forward to fruitful conversations.

Provide examples of occasions when I did not try to engage honestly? 'Listen to the advice' = Just do what I want you to do and think the same. Its funny that recently the emojis pop up but little to no response to the points follow. 'Acknowledge valid viewpoints' = tell me my Ideas are valid. That's no how discussions work. If I don't think your ideas are valid or the reasoning you use to come about them, I am under no obligation to 'validate' your ideas. Your methods should tell you that your ideas are valid. Not someone signing off on it. 'Dismissing viewpoints' = Any examples? Because if you don't provide evidence for a viewpoint then its not worth responding to and a waste of time for both of us. 'Adult up' = Do things the way I do or would or I will think lesser of you. That one seems to track with a lot of the conversations we've had lately. Please, let me know if my = statements were incorrect and as to how?

Coming from someone that regularly avoids answering questions and posts clown emojis. You've shown, time and time again, that you are not interested in having a healthy discussion. You want to prove a point and/or teach a lesson. But not in an empathetic or encouraging way. More like slamming on your brakes in front of a driver that's ticked you off. Doesn't inform or educate. Just makes you feel better to punish someone for existing with differing opinions than you. Have fun with your healthy discussions.

Fair. You haven't ever felt humiliated or degraded. So probably have a difficult time understanding how it might effect another person. Remember your way of coping is not 'correct' necessarily and probably not effective for everyone. I'm sorry you feel so insignificant. The second paragraph seems to be your coping mechanism. Look down your nose at someone who might have empathy for another person. That person working to advocate for a marginalized group being purposefully humiliated on camera for.. I don't even know why they would do that. For money? For clicks? To further drive a wedge between their viewer base and the LGBTQ community? Is that an ethical or moral thing to do to someone? Should that be celebrated? Is it ok to treat another person or group of people like that? And you have an issue with me making the dehumanizing experience of another about myself? Funny you see it that way and take offense to it. Then say it might be indicative of my mental health. These do have significance on mine and your life. Allowing this to happen and sharing it to countless people. Will offer aid and comfort to people who wish harm to this group. It gives them support and recognition that their dehumanizing beliefs are right and good. They are not! Making it more likely they take their hatred(and there is really no other word to use because its not logical or rational) and turn it into violence. That violence can touch anyone, directly or indirectly. And we should work to keep that from happening. Your comments, opinions, and way of thinking. Do the opposite.

Then just answer the question and allow all of us to stop holding our breath. Prove your point. Or is you flex the point? Because you've played this game before. I wasn't to keen on it then either.

Are you saying that if opponents of the plan/strategy would've just held their noses and went along with it, they would've come to the realization that it was a good idea in the long run?

That number might be calculated on the income-based repayment plan. Financially speaking, it may be a better move for a government to get a little money from a citizen as they work. Rather than the whole amount. Which might not allow that person to contribute to the economy in any meaningful way by taking every last penny from a person. Government gets paid back in more ways than just a student loan. If the money can be justifiably offset by allowing each person to buy goods and services and thus spurring a growing economy. As that person works and earns/spends more the money gets put back in the coffers one way or another. What does it matter if its in the form of a check made out to Dept of Ed at 123 Fake St. NW Washington, DC? They're not in the game of breaking knee caps. There's an incentive that people be productive in the long term.

That doesn't really answer the question. No rush. Read up and see what you think? Was it a good idea? What could be done to fix it or do it different/better? Why do you think it had the results it had? My response: It is also, Kansas. I don't think being 13% cheaper than average is a good enough reason to move there. That's just my opinion.

I have a feeling I know the answer already but I'd hate to assume. You know this for a fact, how?

I take it you agree with how this person was treated? Would you feel respected if, upon introducing yourself with your name I decided to call you a different name saying to your face that I knew better who you are and what you should be called? You probably don't have much experience having been made to feel that small and insignificant. On an interview in front of however many people, no less. Immortalized on the internet for everyone to see in perpetuity. Or maybe you do have that experience and feel that others being made to feel that way is appropriate in this and other similar situations. But how do we determine who is made to feel as if they are less than human? Is there a metric? Boxes to check? Pros/cons list? Or is it that they dare... they have the gall... the intestinal fortitude to ask, as a courtesy, to be referred to in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable?

A single person, and these are all just single people, are not national security risks. As much as you might need that to be true, it isn't. These are not coordinated efforts by immigrants to destabilize our country. Unlike those that are working for a Christian ethno-state in Idaho or Utah or just about everywhere else. Who are citizens. With all the rights and privileges that come with it.

So you don't think we should trust the department that is suppose to keep track of all these numbers? Please point me to a more reliable source and we can discuss the bias/unbias nature of that info? But to simply say that you don't trust it without offering a reason (because the mayor could have a political reason to craft a different narrative despite the numbers not saying what you want them to say), smacks of your fear that the info might actually be legit and it runs counter to the idea you have in your head. Either get over it or converse honestly.

Could it be that the only thing conservatives do better than gatekeeping gov't services from people they feel are morally inferior to them(aka, people who desperately need them), is voting against their own best interest.

What is your opinion on the tax policy that was enacted in Kansas? Honest question. Granted Kansas is not the size of California. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment#:~:text=The Kansas experiment was a,by Brownback in May 2012. I'm interested to see your thoughts.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-focuses-migrants-crime-here-is-what-research-shows-2024-04-11/ Commit crime at a lower rate.