He/him she/her etc: what is the meaning?

[Michael Hardner]

33 minutes ago, myata said:

Is your reading fails you now Michael? It was shown and proven above that it has little or actually nothing to do with any rights and everything - with artificially created agendas likely and even probably not out of great love for same sex, trans etc but to secure a nice cozy place in a virtually or totally? unaccountable office.

And I do hope that you will be proven wrong in "most of us" jumping on the first bandwagon whenever and whoever decides to wave another "liberation" flag. It wouldn't bode well for our collective fate... as the dinosaurs found out quite a while back.

The first paragraph is indecipherable.  

If the rights are there, then you're complaining about public morals I guess. 

Like I say, you are right free to do so. People have been complaining about manners for a long time, as in all of history.

[myata]

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

People have been complaining about manners for a long time

Nothing to do with manners either. Don't begin to pretend that you're defining manners here. Politeness, courtesy have nothing to do with it. If someone decides to expose themselves in a public place, with no minors around polite people may pretend to not notice - definitely not repeat the act out of solidarity, bandwagon or any other cause. There's exactly zero reason for me to care about the sex, at birth, physical or any other in my formal communications with my colleagues. If it would concern me so greatly I should be able to satisfy my needs via private channels - no need to update everyone around. If someone is concerned and so on, with letting everybody know about their sex, upfront and out of the blue it's their decision, uniquely so and nobody else's. It doesn't mean that you have to do it too. No you don't have to imitate the act, out of solidarity or otherwise, see above. The bottom line is, when and if we decide to abandon reason and sanity, we shouldn't be expecting good news coming our way. Somehow those two seem to be mutually exclusive.

Edited January 4 by myata

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, myata said:

Nothing to do with manners either. Don't begin to pretend that you're defining manners here. Politeness, courtesy have nothing to do with it. If someone decides to expose themselves in a public place, with no minors around polite people may pretend to not notice - definitely not repeat the act out of solidarity, bandwagon or any other cause. There's exactly zero reason for me to care about the sex, at birth, physical or any other in my formal communications with my colleagues. If it would concern me so greatly I should be able to satisfy my needs via private channels - no need to update everyone around. If someone is concerned and so on, with letting everybody know about their sex, upfront and out of the blue it's their decision, uniquely so and nobody else's. It doesn't mean that you have to do it too. No you don't have to imitate the act, out of solidarity or otherwise, see above. The bottom line is, when and if we decide to abandon reason and sanity, we shouldn't be expecting good news coming our way. Somehow those two seem to be mutually exclusive.

I'm not defining anything.

Please explain your issue objectively in one sentence.

[myata]

18 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Please explain

Do I have to repeat myself? OK.

1. There's exactly zero reason for me to care about the sex, at birth, physical or any other in my formal communications with my colleagues.

2. If someone is concerned and so on, with letting everybody know about their sex, upfront and out of the blue it's their decision, uniquely so and nobody else's.

My issue is that if not controlled, these things were known to progress from "entirely voluntary goodness" to "desirable and expected" and even to "mandated". Yes we have seen precedents and that's why it's important, in such cases for each thinking  and conscious individual to make their own, independent and rational choices and decisions and refrain from jumping on bandwagons even with claims of pure and distilled goodness. If it doesn't make sense it can be ideological agenda promoted by who knows why for what reasons and we will only feel it backfire on us if decide to participate and promote it.

[Michael Hardner]

43 minutes ago, myata said:

Do I have to repeat myself?  

I asked for one sentence. 

I generally agree with your posts, but I am not having any success understanding you. Do you want to try again? One sentence?

 

[Venandi]

1 hour ago, myata said:

There's exactly zero reason for me to care about the sex, at birth, physical or any other in my formal communications with my colleagues.

 

43 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I asked for one sentence. 

I thought the one above was OK but here's mine FWIW:

Don't know, don't care, don't want to know, don't want to participate, none of my business... leave me alone and I'll return the favour.

Morning Michael... how'd I do?

That's about the best deal your'e going to get from me and in return, all I want is nothing. The burning question here is are you willing to give me.... absolutely nothing.

If so, I'll even sweeten the deal by paying for the coffee and muffin it took to convince you that leaving me alone is actually the best possible deal for you. And since you can't actually force me to do anything anyway, why not take yes for an answer and enjoy the coffee?

Will that be a blueberry, chocolate chip, or pumpkin muffin? I recommend the blueberry but fully support the choice you make, I'll even pay for it... you can bring Herb along if you want and I'll extend the same deal to him too.

Just don't force me to eat those new cucumber muffins with broccoli frosting and a sprinkling of crickets to prove my sincerity... see how this works? 

  

Edited January 5 by Venandi

[myata]

There can be no reasonable expectation that any problem or issue can be formulated in one sentence. I did it in three. Yes there can be a real problem if we allow perhaps well meaning or else self-serving and ideologically driven agendas propagate into public space without discussion and checks and then possibly extended to presumed norms or even policies. Yes a sound society has to be careful about that. No problem whatsoever for any private expression. But when an agenda is promoted in a public space including workspace that's when questions should be raised.

[Michael Hardner]

38 minutes ago, Venandi said:

 

Don't know, don't care, don't want to know, don't want to participate, none of my business... leave me alone and I'll return the favour.

Morning Michael... how'd I do?

 

Great 👍 

I feel the same way about superhero movies and video games...

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, myata said:

There's exactly zero reason for me to care about the sex, at birth, physical or any other in my formal communications with my colleagues.

Simply being nice for the sake of being nice isn't reason enough?

Does there have to be something in it for you first? Do you feel that way before holding a door open for someone?

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Simply being nice for the sake of being nice isn't reason enough?

Does there have to be something in it for you first? Do you feel that way before holding a door open for someone?

 

 

We have to face the fact that some people are just ornery. 

 

[eyeball]

33 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

We have to face the fact that some people are just ornery.

Okay. They should probably expect the same in return. If not from the target of their orneriness then bystanders.

We don't need mandates just people who are willing to speak up.

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Okay. They should probably expect the same in return. If not from the target of their orneriness then bystanders.

We don't need mandates just people who are willing to speak up.

 

Oh they'll get that. 

I constantly have to arbitrate with people who don't understand why they have been shunned, especially by younger people, because of behavior that isn't... isn't... say.... culturally accepted? 

My parents are pushing into their '90s, and they express confusion to me about the current state of things. Things. I guess I'm a safe space for them. 

Anyway, I tell them, what do you want to have happen? You're not going to change the world or even change anyone's behavior. If you don't like it, of course you can express yourself and all of us will listen. Gladly. Some might not....

I feel that there will be different people coming to me for answers in the coming years. With questions like.... Why are they getting rid of the CBC?  

Some things just are what they are

[myata]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Simply being nice for the sake of being nice isn't reason enough?

There are different definitions of "nice". When and if someone suggests to you that standing on one foot bending backwards is "nice" because that's what they like or need to do you can say, simply: no. That's not the meaning of the word, for me and in my definition. You're free to keep yours though and keep doing what you like or need. What you aren't free to do is to assume that it can be imposed on others just because you used some nice word.

Edited January 5 by myata

[myata]

17 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

some people are just ornery

Always do what is 'nice' (branded for you) or 'ornery'? And where did critical thinking just fly? Careful with that idea of nicety. But that's exactly how it happens. No one is safe. Supreme goodness is no protection as we know.

Edited January 6 by myata

[eyeball]

41 minutes ago, myata said:

There are different definitions of "nice".

No there isn't there's just different times when you either are or you're not.

Santa knows best.

[myata]

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

No there isn't there's just different times when you either are or you're not.

Blabbering won't get you on the nice list with imaginary Santas. If your definition of nice means that everyone around should be balancing on one foot while bending backwards then my definition would be quite different: arrogant; preposterous; unintelligent (the mild form of the term) and simply no way. The take: nicety is relative, and no heavy calculus needed.

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, myata said:

If your definition of nice means that everyone around should be balancing on one foot while bending backwards

Not at all. I mean as little a thing as holding a door open for someone.

8 hours ago, myata said:

then my definition would be quite different: arrogant; preposterous; unintelligent (the mild form of the term) and simply no way.

Ignorantly, in other words.

8 hours ago, myata said:

The take: nicety is relative, and no heavy calculus needed.

I doubt you'd even notice that anyone had noticed.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, myata said:

Blabbering won't get you on the nice list with imaginary Santas. If your definition of nice means that everyone around should be balancing on one foot while bending backwards then my definition would be quite different: arrogant; preposterous; unintelligent (the mild form of the term) and simply no way. The take: nicety is relative, and no heavy calculus needed.

Have you ever known someone who was fat, and didn't seem to realize it? 

Did you take it upon yourself to explain to them what they really were? 

I'm pretty sure you don't have any trans people in your life. One day... Someone.... Maybe a niece or nephew will change their appearance a little bit, and then you'll go... Hey, wait a second 

 

That's when the real choice will have to get made. Until then this is a theoretical discussion.

[myata]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Did you take it upon yourself to explain to them what they really were? 

Michael either you lost me or deliberately twisting what was said and we all were convinced that you're way above that. I'm not explaining anything to anyone it was the other way around: I'm trying to avoid having to explain/show etc anything to anyone in a public space reserved for communications on certain subject that has nothing to do with sexual orientation, about the orientation. So I'm not explaining anything only communicating about research topic or project schedule, matters that have nothing, exactly nil to do with my sex and so I'm not mentioning it, leaving it out of picture so to say. And you don't have to  - but surely can, do feel free if so obliged. But the moment you try to imply that there's any obligation or expectation for others to do that as folks here stated quite clearly - you'll have to explain the reason. No it's not "nice" to ask people to stand on one foot bending backwards without explaining why. What seems to be so hard to understand here?

[Michael Hardner]

35 minutes ago, myata said:

. No it's not "nice" to ask people to stand on one foot bending backwards without explaining why. What seems to be so hard to understand here?

Well that's an analogy. And that's what I was doing also. 

Just stick with live and let Liv then...

[myata]

9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Just stick with live and let Liv then...

Yes, that is my rule. And what would be yours? Be "nice" or else?

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, myata said:

Yes, that is my rule. And what would be yours? Be "nice" or else?

Golden Rule.

[taxme]

On 1/2/2025 at 10:11 AM, myata said:

Having come across it on a more than a single occasion recently, I set myself a challenge: to find a plausible realistic case, scenario where the exercise could be useful or in fact of make any sense in the sense of carrying valuable information. Could be something like this:

"Hey Linda you were such a great gal working on our last project kudos and the best for the next one" oops it was actually he/his.

If one was clueless enough to send something of the kind to a colleague in a formal setting would correct thoughtful pronouns help? Or what are we trying to say here? What is the message in it, or was it the media, messenger?

Why he/him for the h@ck's sake no really? Could it have been he/her, she/his to avoid confusion? Seriously, what am I missing?

More importantly: who is doing this to us and why - often also, out of our pocket and without asking and as if they really have done everything else we tasked them to and with a perfect grade and quality too? If someone decided, personally and privately to do that for any reason or without such so be it - it's a personal private choice. But who makes the policies, the templates? Who brings your attention to non-compliance and suggest? Why are they paid for it? When did the policy first begin to contradict and then flew out free of the gravity span of the plain common sense?

Or is it just political system that escaped the bounds of reason and reality and launched itself to (infinity and beyond) unknown and unexplored causes and ventures? Who would know? Anyone?

The answer to it all is to just stop playing their social left wing liberal Marxist woke games that are meant to only cause division. Their pronoun and gender woke games serve no purpose other than create confusion and to get stupid no minds to play their silly ass liberal woke games. Works for me. 😇

[-TSS-]

All Indo-European languages have he/she for genders. You can woke the language by inventing new words but old ways die hard.l

In Finnish, Turkish, Hungarian there are no distinctions between men and women when you say he/she.

In Russian, and no doubt in other Slavic languages, when you say a verb in past tense even if you tallk about yourself or the second person, you, you must say it differently depending on whether it is a man or a woman.

One of those things if you speak any of those languages as your own language you don't even think about it, it's just the way it is but if you study them as a foreign language and that thing doesn't exist in your own language it seems a very weird thing to say.

Therefore this pronoun-thing can never break through in Russia/Poland/Serbia/Czech etc

Edited January 11 by -TSS-

[Legato]

If not sure if your dancing with a die or a der put on some Pasodoble music, all will be revealed.