Millet's posts
Posted in Debates Episode 1: Too many people.
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
(Will post all my thoughts tomorrow! Gotta head to bed now that it is over)
Posted in Jungle Jim's International Market
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
I"m down for bug based snacks! Wish bug eating would go more mainstream, way better and sustainable resource.
Sadly don't live anywhere close.
Posted in the LGBTQ+ acronym
Posted 5 years ago
@Bioshock: Alright, I confess I've never studied the history of they/them/their- didn't cross my mind to do so- but I did and you are right. Yes, we are taught in elementary school that they/them/their are plural nouns. I can't speak for every elementary school I suppose, but most at least in local areas follow the same curriculum. So for the state of NH in the US, I can safely say a majority of children are taught they/them/their are plural nouns. And with language channels like this one, state it as plural as well: children's video I had read anecdotes like this one in recent history and admittedly not much further.
Funny enough, looking now at my Elements of Style book given to me in high school- it refers to the singular they being used only in ambiguous contexts of the "subject" of a sentence. For example.
The thing with this book is, it isn't a book focused on grammar but about the ease of reading what is written. So in this case, a majority of people would not have any problem with the singular they. The subject of the sentence is robber. There is no gender specified here, leaving the husband to respond automatically with they in absence of he or she.
So you're completely correct, that since most people using they as a singular in absence of identifying as he or she does actual make total sense that is literally how it is used in singular cases. (also in cases of ambiguous numerics)
Which left me annoyed with "Then why does it bother me so much in a sentence when I know a person I'm referring to?" So from what I have dug up; the discomfort in using it lies, in the fact that when we see/know someone- we don't comprehend them as an ambiguous subject, and it is inherent to us to want to specify our language-which leaves the inclination of people to assume the pronouns of a person that they physically express the most. It isn't meant with malice or judgement at all in most cases, specifying our words is something we are conditioned and taught for the sake of clarity in writing and speaking. It almost feels insulting to refer to someone with the singular they as if to imply-they (lol there is the singular they again) aren't known enough to be given specification. That's obviously not actually the case, but that is what is pulling at the inherent hard wire.
So thank your for helping me reach this new conclusion, my mind is changed.
Funny enough, looking now at my Elements of Style book given to me in high school- it refers to the singular they being used only in ambiguous contexts of the "subject" of a sentence. For example.
Anonymous:
"Looks like the robber stole everything from the house." Mary said while sighing in thought at the injustice of the cirumstance. Her husband raised his brow both in frustration and confusion. "Why would they do that?" He asked knowing no real answer could be given without actually being in the head of the offender-something he'd rather not experience.
"Looks like the robber stole everything from the house." Mary said while sighing in thought at the injustice of the cirumstance. Her husband raised his brow both in frustration and confusion. "Why would they do that?" He asked knowing no real answer could be given without actually being in the head of the offender-something he'd rather not experience.
The thing with this book is, it isn't a book focused on grammar but about the ease of reading what is written. So in this case, a majority of people would not have any problem with the singular they. The subject of the sentence is robber. There is no gender specified here, leaving the husband to respond automatically with they in absence of he or she.
So you're completely correct, that since most people using they as a singular in absence of identifying as he or she does actual make total sense that is literally how it is used in singular cases. (also in cases of ambiguous numerics)
Which left me annoyed with "Then why does it bother me so much in a sentence when I know a person I'm referring to?" So from what I have dug up; the discomfort in using it lies, in the fact that when we see/know someone- we don't comprehend them as an ambiguous subject, and it is inherent to us to want to specify our language-which leaves the inclination of people to assume the pronouns of a person that they physically express the most. It isn't meant with malice or judgement at all in most cases, specifying our words is something we are conditioned and taught for the sake of clarity in writing and speaking. It almost feels insulting to refer to someone with the singular they as if to imply-they (lol there is the singular they again) aren't known enough to be given specification. That's obviously not actually the case, but that is what is pulling at the inherent hard wire.
So thank your for helping me reach this new conclusion, my mind is changed.
Posted in the LGBTQ+ acronym
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
Out of courtesy I try to address people as they want...but I do struggle wrapping my head around
pronouns that go against inherent rules of our language. Such as they/them which is taught since our
youngest years at school- is a plural reference. It kinda complicates language and I don't forsee grammar rules
changing to help the masses get on board with this.
EDIT: after continuing this conversation and doing research, I actually have changed my mind on this. You can read about that on the second page of this thread.
Posted in Debates Episode 1: Too many people.
Posted 5 years ago
Tagging @Saeyra: since I know she was interested.
I can't WAIT for tomorrow.
Posted in [COMIC] Vichard's First Love Story
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
I think my favorite thing about this, is I had to read comics final panel twice before I got the joke.
I was like Why did she say "get it?" and then the second time revealed what I missed.
She got me. :viosunglasses:
Posted in Debates Episode 1: Too many people.
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
Yup, for now he is my favorite but debate season could always change that for me!
Posted in Apparently being transgender is statistically safer......
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
What the heck statistic says that? I attempted several different wordings into google and google scholar and only get links discussing hormone therapy.
Posted in the LGBTQ+ acronym
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
Link 1
Link2
Link 3
the LGBTQ community is more largely affected in contrast to heterosexuals, and due to societal prejudice still being
large- practices are still active and allowed that are dangerous and definitely don't affect anyone other than the LGBTQ community.
The weight of corporations- regardless of intent helps push their group think against the other group think 'gay is bad'.
There is still a majority population against gay rights, and while they thankfully aren't changing laws backwards- they are
still creating a hostile environment and spreading hateful ideals. Is that illegal? Not usually. But it is a dense populated mindset that affects the day to day lives of those who are gay. In general, as newer generations arise- they naturally continue to fade out older generation concepts. This can only continue to thrive by vocalizing the importance of this issue. If the entire LGBTQ went silent on the matters, the opposition absolutely would feel more confident in taking measures to ensure their homophobic ethics reign true and remain an accessible influence to the new generations. These statics would climb even higher once again.
By being vocal, available, and funded we create a safe environment to those still unsafe. By speaking out in volumes those who cannot currently get safe acceptance- they can attempt to validate to themselves they aren't wrong for existing, as the drones of people who are just like them are out there shouting to the world they exist, can't be erased, won't be erased and have no shame in the sexuality many were raised to believe will burn them in the firey pits of hell.
Societal influence is almost if not just as important as law. You'll never change everyone, but so long as people still parade against LGBTQ rights, still get funding for institutions to take harmful counter scientific measures to try and condition them into being straight and get belted for any sort of queer expression- it absolutely means the battle isn't over. Gay teens shouldn't need to make go fund mes to be saved from conversion camps before they feel the need to kill themselves.
Posted in Apparently you can't discuss your pay openly?
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
Ha welcome to business politics.
An employer cannot forbid you from discussing your pay from anyone. But most states in the US are "employee at will" which basically means they can fire you for for numerous reasons so long as it isnt discrimatory. They can't fire you for sharing your pay but they can claim a different conveniently timed reason to cover their asses.
Ultimately, they don't want you or other employees to get upset if someone is making more than you for the same job. If there isn't a genuine reason for them to be making more (such as working far longer than you have. Or in general having more experience im the past making them inherently more valuable/less training.)
When I was 18 I was hired doing housekeeping. Given 10.50 an hour. I had minimal not very noteworthy prior experience. I was the ONLY white person on the housekeeping team. And every other worker had worked for the building 2 years - 5 years longer than me. Everyone else was black/Hispanic. When I found out from one of my coworkers he only makes $8.75 I told him I made $10.50
The housekeepers banded together. Went to HR. Threatened discrimatory wages and that week all of them were given $11 an hour.
I got called down and told I wasn't allowed to discuss my wage. I asked why. They said it wasnt appropriate. I asked where in the policy it said that and HR gave me a displeased look but didn't say more.
They needed me so I wasnt fired and the damage to them already been done. My first biggest example of white privilege to be honest.
Posted in the LGBTQ+ acronym
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
(Sorry for typos. Stuck on mobile right now.)
Posted in the LGBTQ+ acronym
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
@sirlionelnigelconrad:
-I ageee several if not most corporations have a double agenda of backing up the LGBTQ community from a position of profit and looking market friendly. I don't however think this does actual harm. Group think is a legit thing, so when bigger powers come down in support of LGBTQ movements it helps narrow the margin as well as add pressure. Slowly but surely even some of those whom are religious are starting to display tolerance and that widely comes from how vocal the community is both in expressing their arguments and the large support rallied behind it.
-I disagree that we reached our goal and majority is honkey dorey now. Gay Marriage was controversially legalized in 2015 with much backlash and still present large dense populated groups-and voter base who find it important to dismantle this progress. Will they succeed if elected?No. since we addressed the rights as a constitutional right, and church and state are supposed to remain separated. It's only been 4 years, and hate is certainly still widespread. I know itll always exist in some capacity- but a majority households in the US are Christian (and while there are Christians for gay rights. A majority hold the buble tight and are against it. Gay Conversion therapy still hasnt been founded to be ethically wrong and is still in practice throughout many parts of the country.
To me a "win" for US would be when the large majority of society accepts gays and doesn't sit there waiting for meteors to fly down in their gay weddings. It is still a societal issue until the large majority of society is on board. We might have the legal and powerful champion belt for 4 years now. But 4 years isnt long enough to wipe our hands and call it a job done. And you can vet your butt showing complacency will invite the other side to pull weight more for their bible agenda.
As for the parades- Idk. Regardless of identity I see people as individuals and if people really are hyper sexualizing things in public areas to the extent kids shouldn't be there I agree thats just gross. The peide marches we have in my state are very family friendly - aside from giant a penis balloon ive yet to see anything id not bring a kid around. So I really wonder if that kinda "issue" is mostly in isolated areas with a minority of participants and just being over hyped? Maybe it happens in your area but in quaint new england for US I haven't.
Posted in the LGBTQ+ acronym
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
(There's a few different topics covered in this thread, so I'ma seperate my response by them.)
On the topic of the acronym- people can say it however they want. LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBTQIA etc whatever floats their boats.
On the topic of people shouting "Straight Pride"
How I explain Pride to those who don't get it.
Pride comes from two sources usually.
Either you have pride in something you accomplished, something that was challenging or took a lot of effort.
Or you have pride in something despite it being seen as the contrary.
Straight Pride just doesn't make sense. Most people are straight. Straight is accepted. No one is being hanged for being straight.
Being straight isn't being contrary. It's the norm. To have pride in such a thing is rather silly?
"I am proud to be straight!" Good for you and most of the world? okay. and? Is there more to that? What is the source of this pride, what is the intention for saying this?
The LGBTQ community using the terminology pride, is entirely because it isn't accepted, it isn't the norm. No one is gay for the sake of being different- it isn't a choice. And saying "I take pride in this" is a example of Brave, it's telling the many who are shouting "Go to hell" "don't get adoption rights" "don't get marriage rights" "ew I think he's checking me, a straight male out. disgusting" IDGAF, I'm ME and I won't be shamed for being ME.
On the topic of Pedophiles looking for recognition. I'm very passionate about Psychology and I worked in a adolescent psychward (ages 6-22)
where we had 4 pedophiles. It's equally as true to say the attraction to young children is not a choice as anything else is. That's just a fact.
Those who sexually act on those who cannot consent. absolutely need to be charged as criminals- but it is unhealthy, and entirely counter productive to take everyone who is a pedophile and throw them into a basket of disgusting, universally prison material, hell burning scum. Many are non offenders, and many would do anything in the world, if possible, to NOT be pedophiles.
Anything that affects ones ability to reasonably function in society, for prolonged periods of time- usually falls into the mental disorder category.
Pedophiles are sick and they need some level of societal understanding. By blanket shaming them and wishing the worst on all of them- you limit their abilities to get help. You limit their comforts to open up. You establish a line of black and white thinking and as a whole society that prevents them from getting help. A lack of help heightens the chances of offending.
Pedophiles can't help that they are pedophiles no more than someone with Bipolar can help that they are bipolar- they may have meds. There isn't a pill for pedophiles. (INB4: ;castration- thats pretty inhumane to pressure anyone into)
potentionally triggering material below
Do I think its appropriate they are apart of the LGBTQ title? No. But I can understand with their reasoning for wanting inclusion. It isn't to normalize having nonconsenusal intercousre with children, its so bring awareness that this exists- and they cant help it- they can't choose what they are attracted to. and they need help, and resources that to this day are not well available. 3 of the 4 boys I worked with hated themselves. Multiple attempts at suicide. (older teens). and one of those 3 was an offender to his own sibling. he asked his parents many, many times for help before offending. They beat him. told him to get over it. Instead of finding him help.
He ended up being an offender. His parents took no initiative to get him help or protect the sibling despite being fully aware of his pleas. he still did the deed and he's still at fault, and he's paying the price. That girl may need immense amounts of help to cope....
The access to specifically trained counselors to assist with pedophiles is very small, despite the need for them. Non-Offenders shouldn't get the bad rap of actual offenders...forced into silence and to suffer alone for fear of their lives. over something they didn't choose to have.
Posted in What silly nicknames do you give your pets?
Posted 5 years ago
Millet, spilling the tea:
Lacey Blue
-Lacey Bobbers (Fiance' came up with it, he said it so many times it stook.)
-Trash Cat: Mean nick name, she is a rescue kitty and was found starving and dying in a trash bag. She also jumps into our trash bin a lot so I started calling her trash cat.
-Mouth: When she's hungry she does a really long meow with her mouth completely open to the point you can't see her face. So mouth.
-Shark cat: When you don't feed her quick enough she bites your leg. She swirls around your legs like a shark for prey. And she's grey and white.
-Goomba: What my fiance calls her (the mushroom thing from mario) I disagree with this nick name but again he says it so much it sticks.
-Beast child: She's food obsessed and will stalk my fiance and I if she sees us eating almost anything. She'll lunge and swipe like a ninja.
-Bobbarian (mixing the bobbers nick name with barbarian) and or Dust Mite: She likes to roll around in her litterbox and cover herself in litter- then spazz and run launching the litter everywhere in mass amounts.
Video