For whatever reason we are not understanding each other. I don’t think I can restate it any more clearly. I guess we just have to leave it at that.

Let me put it another way. You are wrong in regards to trans participation in sports but not because you are being a contrarian. You are also wrong to use your contrarian stance to justify your opinion. Hopefully that clears things up.

I’m not saying you’re wrong because you’re contrarian, most of the people here fall into the category. What I am saying is that using the fact that an opinion is contrarian is not evidence that it is correct.

The new talking point is that man made climate change is real but burning oil isn’t causing the world to warm. But that does mean we can geoengineer our climate to be cooler. 🙃

It’s frankly disgusting to compare this to people wanting free Netflix. I know that’s not exactly what’s happening here but I think we’re loosing the plot.

Contrarian has a definition, it isn’t relative to what my opinion is but the mainstream. The point is you’re using the fact that your opinions are contrarian as evidence that your opinions are correct. It is funny.

Like I said elsewhere, you’re competing with the internet for the most contrarian take. You revealed that trans athletes is not an issue you support because they are such a small group of the whole. But when you feel insecure or challenged about your “hot take” you do the contrarian line of “it’s impossible for 100% of the people on the group to agree” as if this is a matter of opinion and not facts. As long as it is rooted in opinions, you are free to claim the most contrarian take possible.

T is only one letter of 4+. And trans-women is only half of T. And athlete trans women is a small subset of that. And athlete trans women that want to play in women’s leagues are a subset of that.

Wow that’s revealing more than you probably wanted.

Nah, this is just a contrarian contest.

deleted by creator

That is a good point, and I think the difficult part is the initial change. Once you connect to a revolutionary/vanguard community with it’s own cultural riches on the other end then it is as you say, the less exhausting option.

It’s like saying the Republicans are right that you should be scared of immigrants and then being surprised when people vote out of fear for the person who will hurt those immigrants more. They didn’t campaign on mass deportation as one has claimed, but they did justify people’s fears of immigrants.

Revolution sounds exhausting. Blaming voters means I can simply wait for other people to change by learning the right lessons even though they never seem to.

It’s not just protesting though, we use it to train and organize people so later we can respond when the time comes. We need a diversity of tactics which is why I don’t criticize how people protest anymore, as long as you are causing good trouble then you are not the problem.

That was just from Trump’s first term. Fuck.

My daycare closed for a day so they could get their passports “just in case”. This shit is infuriating.

If you think critics of wokeness are wrong, then show why. Don’t just insult them and pretend that counts as insight.

Why would someone take the time to explain something to someone arguing in bad faith? Sounds like a foolish endeavor.

I’ll leave you with the words from OP elsewhere in this thread because it equally applies to you:

Thanks, but I didn’t ask that and your assertion is based on your own bias/opinion

Yes I had an inflammatory response. I honestly don’t perceive OP as making a good faith argument when they say “negative effects of wokeness”. It’s a thought terminating cliche.

Okay then, swap out AI with wokeness, it still doesn’t come to the level of a “worldview”. It is still an observation.

everyone who disagrees with my worldview is a bot

I hardly consider my opinion on AI a “worldview”. It is an observation that generative AI use in decision making and creativity reduces cognitive activity. Yes I asked OP to disprove me in an “ad-hominem” manner though. I guess we violently agree on that?

Not really… AI bots are bad at providing value because they have no values and don’t understand context. You can deliver a scathing reproach that has value as long as it fits the context and reflects your values. But do you consider your response an ad-hominem?