Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Slemon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 298
The Lounge / Re: We need to talk about Dr Who (come at me Jane!)
« on: March 14, 2020, 09:52:09 AM »
I'm just here for Doctor Who.

Eh, my perspective is different to a lot of people because I'm into the EU, so I have firsthand experience of:
a) poor writing on the show's part in no way ruins a Doctor becuse they're always going to show up in novels and audios, with different writers, so you end up with the much-maligned Colin Baker actually being a lot of people's favourite Doctor on audio
b) revelations and reveals no one likes just get ignored, else the Doctor would still be half-human.

I have my issues with Chibnall's run, but I'm more likely to blame Chibnall than I am Whittaker.
Thirteen as a Doctor has some really nice traits. The Doctor as someone who's incredibly competent but still likes to chill sometimes is a recurring trait, and for Whittaker it's just ramped up to the point that next to nothing actually bothers her. Once you've stared down a few gods, why on earth would you be bothered by some generic alien species? The whimsy's ramped up for her because she's accepted the fact she doesn't need to be scared. That's why you end up with moments like Resolution where what would normally be the big dramatic confrontation with a Dalek has her just laughing her head off at it in genuine amusement because why would she be afraid of some tin can she's defeated dozens if not hundreds of times before? She gets serious when lives are in danger, but beyond that she takes nothing seriously because, well, why would she? It's reminiscent of Seven being faced with the so-named Gods of Ragnarok and literally deciding to just do parlour tricks.
It's a character angle I love, albeit it comes with a few things I'm not a huge fan of, like Chibnall bringing back RTD's near-deification of the Time Lords.
Her companions, yeah, they took two seasons before their characterisation felt distinct. Graham was the jokey guy, but they were flat beyond that. I'm hoping her next season sees Graham and Ryan leave, because the story would allow for it and focusing in on just Yaz, who's now clearly a much more reckless character, has really interesting potential. I've heard from someone who watched the classic series when it was on that it's reminding them of Five's era, where there were so many companions that none of them were made particularly interesting because attention was split too much between them. I like them in theory, and I was interested in the dynamic of multiple companions, but so few episodes do anything with all of them that they either need to cut down the cast or have more multi-parters.

There are still good moments. Rosa, Demons of the Punjab were great and bringing back near-straight historicals certainly plays to the series' strength as there's a more established setting to split the cast up in. Spyfall Part 1 was a solid romp, The Haunting of Villa Diodati was mostly brilliant with a wonderfully expanding scope (and hilarious when you remember that according to the audios, Eight's going to show up and bug them the next day). It's just that they tend to be significantly better than most of the surrounding episodes as opposed to more minor peaks, and they generally work because of some focal element beyond the main cast, whether the historical side, or atmosphere/villain design. There's no good character episodes.
Then there are episodes like Witchfinders and It Takes You Away that feel more like they should have been two-parters, with a perfect point for a cliffhanger, but because they're not that they feel rushed and lack the impact they should.

My biggest concern is Chibnall.
One, I know Broadchurch was meant to be stellar, but I think he wrote, like, every episode of that which means he had so much more creative control, and I feel his editing muscles have gone downhill because of it. So many things should have been tweaked and changed, but weren't. You could cut the whole last act out of Witchfinders, shake up Timeless Children (more on that later) and so many complaints would have gone away, but...
Two, taking DW back to its more edutainment roots isn't a terrible idea, but he struggles with sublety, Orphan 55's the best example, quiet theming would've worked better than just having the Doctor look directly into the camera. That being said, that ties into:
Three, the unfortunate meta problem of the audience. RTD wrote a show for kids, and I was a kid when I watched it. Moffat took the Harry Potter approach and had the show grow up somewhat with the audience, tackling darker and more mature themes, something like World Enough and Time's 'pain... pain... pain...' is spine-chilling even as an adult, that probably would've sent me behind the sofa years ago. Chibnall's gone back to focus on a younger audience, so you get something more like the Doctor as Barney the Dinosaur with a bunch of random people to bounce ideas off of on a monster-of-the-week romp, but, well, a lot of the audience aren't kids any more. We've been spoiled by years more stuff. Imagine, say, Chibnall writing the Slitheen, aliens that invade the Earth by farting a lot, he'd be bloody crucified but no one really cared back then.
Four, I don't actually know if he wants to be writing Doctor Who. His first season was devoid of any continuity, his second season completely screwed over Moffat's last without even a word, RTD got very surface-level nods that were nearly copy-pasted script-wise, though at least there was some Classic acknowledgement. It's just a bit weird.

Things I will stand by are:
Jodie Whittaker is a good Doctor, with a fresh interpretation that has serious potential, but it's hampered by the writing's unwillingness to commit to anything deep.
The companions individually are interesting and have personalities that mesh well, but they take too much screen time from each other so no one gets a chance to stand out.
The idea of multiple companions all playing off each other is a good one, but there need to be more multi-part stories or fewer companions to give them focus.
Individual episodes are good, but the overall quality is lowered enough that first impressions and expectation can dampen enjoyment of what would otherwise be great.
Chibnall's approach isn't irredeemable, but it's unclear what the target demographic is.
The actual monster design last season was top tier, even when the monsters themselves were just ok.

Plus part of me's just annoyed that with the whole run of the new series, we've never gone back to the days of having a companion that isn't from Earth in the present.
It doesn't help if you engage with the fandom and run into people that still think Ten and Rose are the only actual thing that counts as Real Doctor Who and everything else is wrong, negativity poisons a lot.

Timeless Children is... complicated, I could talk a lot about the reveal and my mixed feelings, and how overblown the reaction has been, but it is an episode that epitomises a lot of the flaws in the writing to me. It has two moments that were some of the darkest TV-Who's ever had to offer, and they were completely ruined by light sweet gentle music or a lack of focus that it felt like either Chibnall didn't think it through or (if I'm right) he wrote a dark story, then hastily scribbled over it on the second draft because he's much more intent on making a younger-oriented show even when it screws over the story he'd actually written. It genuinely felt like there were two drafts vying for dominance and as a result neither quite worked.
The reveal though, eh, the people saying Chibnall killed Doctor Who need to grow up. Doctor Who survived:


It's been going almost sixty years at this point, there's always good and bad mixed in. This isn't the best it's been, but there are still good parts mixed in with the lack of focus. I'm hoping Chibnall's learned from the objections for his next season, just like he acknowledged the objections from people who wanted continuity for the last season.

But honestly, I just love Doctor Who in its basic premise, and I take a perverse kind of joy in trying to fit all the continuity together because you get some fun reveals that way. (Leela's the Doctor's mother and the Doctor is a vampire). It isn't that bad, Jodie Whittaker does a damn good job as the Doctor, but I don't think Chibnall's up to the job of showrunner. None of his episodes for Doctor Who were outstanding (as opposed to Moffat taking over after having written some of the best of the first four seasons), and while his pedigree on other shows is apparently good (I'm not familiar) it doesn't translate to weekly sci-fi or to everything else running a writer's room requires. From what I've seen he's either not been head writer, or been head writer while also writing most of a show, on almost all of his past projects (judging by wikipedia). He was involved with Torchwood but, like, the first two seasons weren't exactly consistently good, and the third series (which seems to have been done without him) was by far the best so...
I'm hoping he's picking up the skills necessary to wrangle multiple writers and edit all those distinct stories into a cohesive whole, but I thought we'd reached that point after Resolution so eh. I'm still enjoying it well enough, even if it's not as good as the seasons before he took over.

This was more rambling than anyone wanted but once I start I can't stop

But SOMEONE had to show up to make that happen ;)
[I vote to lynch SMF]

So boydster was helping you as I suspected, just not as long as I thought.
I was never going to play by alt. I did one thing to screw with people who only suspected me for meta reasons as a counterbalance, then got into the game after even if it made me look guilty because the interaction's the fun part. Boydster didn't help me unless you were using an unfair advantage  :P

When did you actually start honest now
Riiiiight at the end of night two in a moment of 'wait shit this is going on?!'
Was actually thinking of turning Crouton, but knew that'd sign my death warrant and put him at a disadvantage so opted to roll the dice. Almost worked out which isn't bad for someone who was apparently scanned.

Y'all are welcome! Well done Jane you almost had me convinced, you sold your story very very well.
Scrambling for control after missing the start  :P

Boydster wasn't really helping to be fair, more keeping the balance. I was a night behind and missing the partner I should've had if I'd been around to turn someone. This was very close to going differently.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 05:32:44 PM »
If you lynch me, I can categorically state that the game will be over.
I mean. I didn't lie.

..but you would have gladly slurped on a villager smoothie, right?
They killed you with zero input from me, I don't see why you'd defend them.

would you have dissuaded them, had you not been MIA?
We'll never know now.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 05:30:04 PM »
If you lynch me, I can categorically state that the game will be over.
I mean. I didn't lie.

..but you would have gladly slurped on a villager smoothie, right?
They killed you with zero input from me, I don't see why you'd defend them.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 05:23:49 PM »
If you lynch me, I can categorically state that the game will be over.
I mean. I didn't lie.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 05:04:01 PM »
I demand that I punch the concept of SMF in my death scene.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 05:01:45 PM »
Despite my suspicions of you for reasons already stated. There is now a player claiming to be the seer and has scanned you.

So we shall soon see if that person will either be dog food or a hero.
Or forgetting that Lycans exist.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 04:56:50 PM »
Welp. Been a fun game for what little I've been here for.

To be fair Jane, I was 100 percent on you, however, your story was so convincing I actually believed it. If you are bad, props be to you
Not a story. I didn't know the game had started; I like the engaging, the trash talking... I wouldn't skip all that. This is the whole reason I play it.

The true villain is SMF.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 04:39:18 PM »
Welp. Been a fun game for what little I've been here for.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 04:37:32 PM »
Aaaand forcing a tie with twenty minutes to go  >:(

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 04:29:32 PM »
Who has the colonoscopy power or whatever it's called? Doesn't someone have some power to scan someone and tell us who is the the evil one?
Only if they scanned the right people over the last couple of nights, and even then there's at least one Lycan in play so that's not wholly reliable.

I'm assuming NSS was on the ghost-approved list rather than Junker pulling his name out of nowhere.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 04:06:10 PM »
Well I'm not dying for a reason this dumb  >:(
In the absence of hearing anything to go on from the ghosts...

[I vote to beat NSS to death with a herring]

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Brexit
« on: September 03, 2019, 03:54:54 PM »

So if the PM doesn't like the way the government is voting he can just force another election?  This seems like a very weird system of government.
The last time the Tories did it, they lost seats. It's not an instant win button, but it can help clear roadblocks. The UK's system isn't like the US's where the President's elected separately to party, the PM is just the leader of whichever party controls the House, so being able to shuffle that up is potentially beneficial.
That being said there is a worry that Boris at the helm will inexplicably get them votes from the people that just see him as amusing.

It's odd that the politicians simply don't scrap it.
They're the ones with hedge funds abroad that're poised to do better. They aren't doing this because they care about the people.

The Lounge / Re: [Day] Werepenguin XVII: Werepenguinwolf - The Game Thread
« on: September 03, 2019, 09:27:55 AM »
If you lynch me, I can categorically state that the game will be over. I'm not normally one to do the whole defensive thing, but I really, really don't want the reason we lose to be because SMF is a mess. That's just embarrassing. If my understanding of the game is right, the wolf would've likely turned someone on night one, and killed night two, which means we lose a majority if a villager dies.
I'll listen to the ghosts. With the seer (and possibly aura seer, depending on how evils are read) we should know of innocent players, at the very least. We can spot evils too, but there's at least a 1/3 or 1/2 chance that that's just a Lycan, more if there's more than one, so those aren't great odds to base the game on, but with the Seer and Aura Seer together we should have a list of up to four innocents the ghosts can put above suspicion. Obviously not something to post in the main thread, I'm not saying that, but they can sort through the shady characters.

My money's on Stash. The day one behaviour there was weird (and got called out at the time so I know I'm not the only one).
And if we're suspecting people who've been quiet, Junker's barely done anything except to vote for crutchwater, while saying he suspected he was innocent, which... I've done that exact thing when I'm evil. This isn't even a game where vote manipulation can happen so it was a pretty pointless vote.

I'm tossing the ball to the ghosts.

The Lounge / Re: A werepenguin development
« on: September 02, 2019, 07:17:18 AM »
Have you advertised to the heretics on the Other Side?

Purely to get the 666 out of my post count: you guys do realise that there are two wolves now, right? The first night silence looks like it was either alpha wolf or Cursed.
But there are six of us left alive, so if it was Cursed with two wolves, we're dead. Assuming it was alpha wolf, or a Cursed with just one living wolf, then the wrong person dying today means we're dead. Someone dies today, someone dies in the night, 2v2 tie.

So in the interests of that, I feel I should point out I logged out because I needed a break, not to pre-emptively prep for a game of werepenguin days before the damn thing even started. Hand on my heart, I legitimately did not know this game was going until recently. Normally I'd support killing me if I'm a distraction as it least it narrows down the numbers, but we do not have the numbers to be narrowed down. If you're going to kill me, at least get something better than 'Wasn't around since the 25th, for a game that started on the 27th, came in late when SMF decided it was worth letting her know she had mail.'
Although full disclosure, playing WP via an alt is absolutely something I would do because that's evil. I like the way you think.

Anyway, goodbye again.

The Lounge / Re: A werepenguin development
« on: August 31, 2019, 03:23:13 PM »
Personally I'm moving there until the FES just embraces it and becomes the Werepenguin Earth Society.

Oh look she pops up now!

Definitely just a coincidence am I right?
I mean. Not to be boring but if I was evil I'd be sitting quiet happily. This absolutely looks like the dumbest thing I could have done and I absolutely should have read the thread first, you're not getting any question from me on that.

In conclusion, this appears to have been a terrible time to come back, I distrust Stash for jumping so quickly onto Crutchwater, and I can see, like, two separate ways for nothing overt to happen on night one in the rules from just a cursory scan so anyone claiming to know with certainty what that quiet means is seriously shady to me. 

[I vote to lynch SMF]
PM email notifications are terrible. Hi all! Time to find out what's been happening, and please tell me I'm not dead already.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 05:17:00 PM »
You're talking to the queer girl here. Fun facts! Anyone remotely active in the community knows a few trans people, and has knows at least one person who's attempted to or has killed themselves because of precisely the vitriol you're spewing here.
And for what? You aren't protecting anyone, that's palpably obvious. You're not doing anything to actually reduce danger, to actually target criminals, you're just making an assumption about a community and riding the hardline conservative prejudice to victory on it ignoring the blood on your hands. Because let's not mince words here. You're not making anything safer, you're not acting to stop predators. You're deciding a whole community has to be a predator, ignoring the predators outside it, and shrugging over the real people caught in the crossfire. In some cases you're just plain making it easier for actual predators.
You're not looking for dangers, you're looking for trans people, assuming they're the dangers, and ignoring all the other dangers rather than tackling the actual problem.

So no, don't pretend it's about protecting anyone. That's an old line, so is "I care about them, really!" And it hasn't been true yet. All you're doing is scapegoating, or finding some socially acceptable way to vent your prejudices, inventing danger so you can feel satisfied you overcame it. Meanwhile people actually live in the world with the shitstorm you stir up.
There are bad people in every community. Sure, some trans people are going to be dangerous, but I promise you that for every actual trans predator out there, there's two or three kids that killed themselves because of people like you, and don't for a fucking second pretend otherwise. No amount of hand-wringing or excuses is going to change that it is exactly this that's to blame. Exactly what you're saying here, all this pointless manipulation and invented controversy, you know precisely the attitude that invokes. It's vile, and I'm not going to act like it's not.

You're talking to the person that's actually talked to plenty of people affected. It isn't some academic debate.
Every single time the conclusions of your supposed premises are pointed out, you back down, and it always comes back to the same points. "Trans women aren't women!" "Trans men aren't men!" (They're just getting laid a lot in prison, SCG, as you apparently missed that). Because that's literally all this is. There's no lofty goals of protection, there's no making things safer or easier, it's just prejudice, plain and simple. It's old hat by now, and it's always disgusting when it tries to co-opt actually important movements. Just assuming that a whole community of people has to be lying, or predators.
So if you're wondering why I have no patience for it, there you go: there are actual people whose lives are at stake, so many more than the overblown handful of victims of mostly-invented cases of the eeeeevvil trans women, and the collective answer is 'screw them' for absolutely no good reason. For blind adherence to an incorrect and insignificant prejudice.

tl;dr: stereotyping a community protects no one, if you're looking for trans people rather than dangerous people then that's just being an asshole, gender doesn't matter and sex matters to your doctor and pretty much no one else, people are dying you penguins.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 04:52:09 PM »
We have women only gyms and spaces because some women fill uncomfortable with men gawking at them. Even if a trans is not violent, why should a woman share a shower and toilet and eat with a guy (trans or pretending) when he still has his chopper
So does that extend to women, the people who'd definitely be sexually attracted to women rather than trans women who might well like guys exclusively, or are you just punishing a whole community over a stereotype again?

I actually don't have an issue with a cis male being put in a womens prison if they have lived a life as a woman, have all the hormones done as well as chopping off their dick. If they decide one day tey want to live life as a woman and look everything like a guy right down to a hairy nutsack, it's simply not good enough.
Personally I tend to not expect someone to have fucking surgery on their genitals before treating them like a human being.
Early in transition, eh, that's the only point you might have an argument and even then more down to the limitations a lot of countries put down to make transitioning harder. That's about the only stage where you have even a hope of arguing they're an opportunist, because the number of people who'd permanently change their bodies like that and earn the ire of, well, almost everyone in this thread alone let alone the rest of the world... just to be a creep? Uh, no, that's paranoia.
Otherwise only taking the radical step of not actively being an asshole to someone until they're had years of often expensive medical treatment? Nope. You're the dick there.

Female prisoners, no matter their crime, belong in female prisons.
So... it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with protecting prisoners from potentially dangerous inmates, so you can fuck right off with pretending that.

Transwomen are not female. Male and female aren't identities, they are sexes. You are born one or the other (even people with DSDs are either male or female). If a transwoman commits a crime, they do not belong in female prisons.
They're identities. No one cares about chromosomes. Literally, they just don't. You're as aware as I am there's more than just XX and XY, can you honestly tell me for certain what even yours are? I couldn't tell you mine. I could take an informed guess, but eh, couldn't say for sure. Chromosomes don't matter save between you and your doctor and potentially romantic partner.

I have no idea what all your hmmmm hmmmmm hmmmmmmmms are about, but it's pretty hilarious.
It is, though probably not for the reason you want.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 04:32:31 PM »
Imagine some incel alpha male piece of shit having a legal framework that allowed him to sook about 'human rights abuses' because he suddenly woke up as a woman in a male jail because you know - gender is fluid lol. Imagine if the legal framework existed for him to be transferred to a womans jail.
You're acting like I wouldn't pay to see an incel self-declared alpha male to end up surrounded by a crowd of violent women, convicted murderers and assaulters both, and vastly outnumbered.

You're kinda overestimating how strong men actually are. I think you'll find people that try to abuse it would come to regret their decision pretty damn fast.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 04:27:18 PM »
I know your dangerhair is standing on end right now, but there are lots of men, who weren't trans when they committed their crimes, who are now claiming to be trans so they can get moved to the female estate.
Jesus you are paranoid. Yes, there are going to be utter monsters in any community, and maybe a handful of opportunists though more likely a handful gaming the system to get hormones for free, deciding to punish a whole community for that is the definition of prejudice. Are you going to propose sending cis female rapists and child molesters to male prisons? You 'don't care' about them after all. They're going to be dangerous to women in the same prison as them, after all.
You don't care about protecting women. Nothing you are saying is about protecting women. You're just utterly fucking over women you personally don't like.

Funny you don't see lots of trans men trying to get moved to male prisons, isn't it?
Hmm. You put some men who're probably attracted to women in a place where they're surrounded by predominantly-straight women that're out of contact with the rest of the world for a while. Hmmm. Hmmmmmmmm.

Trans women are female. That's what trans means. Get over yourself. As a general rule I trust what someone says their own identity is as they're going to have more of an idea than a stranger.

Also, no one said we are calling all trans people sex offenders etc. But it puts women in a bad situation, so why take that risk?
Women are in danger walking down the street or going to a party if cis men happen to be there. Why take the risk? Let's pass a law banning all cis men from ever interacting with women.
It doesn't put them in a 'bad situation.' The situation is not any worse. You can get assaulted by literally anyone. You're literally just deciding "Oh, no, this community's evil on principle," and punishing all of them for the actions of a few, meanwhile other communities with members that do the exact same thing go unpunished because, y'know, it isn't about protecting women. So, yes, you are calling the whole community sex offenders because normally we just target the perpetrators rather than passing a law to punish every member of a group. This is literally just the lesbophobia of years back all over again, the exact people are saying it and basically the exact people are eating it up, only now transphobes of other stripes are using it as an excuse.
Hell, bathroom bills just make it worse. Go look up the photos of trans men needing to go to women's bathrooms, tell me you don't think that's going to make it easier for predators to sneak in.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 04:04:15 PM »
And of course, what's the alternative? Oh, right, chuck a trans woman in a male prison, and you can fuck right off with that if you're even going to pretend you give a damn about anything even approaching empathy.

Certainly if they have a dick, then yeah, throw them in with the other dicks.
Think about that for more than a couple of seconds, think about how it would look, and if you can do that without suddenly feeling viscerally sick you need help.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 03:47:20 PM »
I also hope you'd be against putting male sex offenders, or other violent males into female prisons just because they identify as trans. 
Try again, see if you get it right this time.

I know you don't care about women, what is it you want me to get right?
*Have empathy
Let's see, so: "I also hope you'd be against putting male sex offenders, or other violent males into female prisons just because they identify as trans."
Well to begin with, not 'males who identify as trans' in this case as your intent is pretty obvious. So step one:
"Female sex offenders and other violent women in female prisons who happen to be trans."
But step two, why are you specifiying the offense? That's not relevant to what you're saying, unless you're now saying being female and being violent/a sex offender are incompatible, which... no, that's nonsense. It's just there do you can play off the 'trans women are actually secretly violent men out to hurt the innocent cis women!' stereotype in a pretty up-front manipulation tactic. So a question that actually makes sense as a question would be:

"Are you saying female criminals who happen to be trans should be in a female prison?"

And yes. Easily. Because on one hand, even if we take your 'they're just violent sex offenders!' spiel, there are plenty of cis women who're guilty of that and of assault, and guess where they end up? Oh, right, prison. Will they hurt other prisoners? Eh, same odds as other criminals in there, and they're going to be one person somewhere that's filled with guards with equipment and ready-made groups, and if they're actually a violent offender they're going to be in a high security prison, and in turn be surrounded by violent people. There's nothing they can do that any other violent inmate (which, remember, would make up most of their fellow prisoners if that's what they're guilty of) could not also do; even if you want to make it about sexual assault, it doesn't stop being a violation if a cis women perpetrates it. Even in this uber-extreme scenario maybe the one thing that's even conceivably possible is pregnancy, which is going to require you go through the whole 'trans woman,' 'is actually violent rather than, you know, a normal fucking person,' 'is able to deal with all the prison safeguards specifically designed to stop inmates hurting each other,' 'is able to overpower an inmate who, reminder, is also going to be a violent criminal,' and you're still met with basically non-existent odds because, y'know, hormones kinda get in the way of that even assuming that's a body part they'd want to use because, again, trans.
To take a non-cartoonish depiction of, y'know, real people that actually exist, it's more likely to be someone that made a dumb mistake from poverty, possibly drug-related thanks to the US's ever-successful war on drugs... So. Not someone that's actually going to be a danger, and is way more likely to be a target than a perpetrator because transphobia hardly vanishes in prison. Personally I'd be way more concerned with male guards in a position of power and poor prison oversight and care that allow such problems, rather than plain old transphobic fearmongering that ultimately amounts to nothing. But of course, your intent isn't actually helping anyone.
And of course, what's the alternative? Oh, right, chuck a trans woman in a male prison, and you can fuck right off with that if you're even going to pretend you give a damn about anything even approaching empathy.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 02:30:02 PM »
I mean I hate to do this after I'm... 50% sure you agreed with me? (Odds are: 50% agreement, 30% disagreement without realising you were agreeing, 15% drunk, 5% spontaneously turned into a wallaby and we're in a 10,000 monkeys situation). It's just too much fun to point out.

Are you seriously suggesting that people should NOT talk about a certain issue because it's not 'number 1'? This is the kind of argument people make when they want to interject but have nothing to add to the discussion. ie trolling
I don't 'warrior' because the battle is largely won already. No where near me is there a problem with the way fats are treated or women are treated 2nd class for being women. The places all these progressive values need to be fought in aren't 'in the western developed countries' but the developing countries or the Middle East etc where women are 2nd class and homosexuality is outlawed to the point where people cheer as they are whipped or bound and thrown off rooftops to their death.  Is The West free of problems. Not 100% but no country will ever be free of criminals or people who are simply dicks to other people.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Go woke, go broke lol
« on: August 25, 2019, 01:17:46 PM »
I also hope you'd be against putting male sex offenders, or other violent males into female prisons just because they identify as trans. 
Try again, see if you get it right this time.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 298