Hmm, well I’m not sure I agree that there is a big conspiracy or campaign, but I understand the logic.

How is calling someone a groomer related to fascism? Or is it just more of a correlation thing?

Mass shootings weren’t even defined before. We didn’t talk about them because they weren’t tracked. Even now the definition of mass shooting isn’t settled, with some definitions having about a dozen per year, and others having about 2 per day.

Yes, it’s a way to move forward with incomplete knowledge, when you need to make assumptions regardless of which theory you go with. There will always be an asterisk by theories or decisions made with this method, because one of more of the assumptions themselves could later turn out to be incorrect, thereby invalidating your decision. Occams razor is very misunderstood and used or quoted incorrectly all the time.

I had similar experiences, and couldn’t understand why they would discourage dialog and discussion around various issues. The thing is, they don’t actually want dialog, they want to stamp out opposition to their views as though it never existed.

You probably commented on one of the verboten subreddits. That’s how I got most of my bans.

Hah! I remember reddit

Yes, everyone is unique to some degree. For instance my wife’s uterus is slightly tilted. It rarely matters, but every once in a while it causes discomfort. Knowing this, doctors don’t need to over react to additional and unexpected discomfort during pregnancy. But this isn’t relevant most of the time, so hospitals focus on factors that help quickly and efficiently diagnose the issue. Age and sex are probably the biggest of these factors, along with medical history. Gender identity is usually not important, though in some cases it could help identify someone who is intersex. But these cases are rare enough not to warrant their own check box, much like a tilted uterus.

Maybe I’m not understanding your comment, but in certain contexts, gender identity is not relevant but biological sex IS, such as in treatment or early diagnosis of cancers that are specific to one sex or the other. Hospitals need to be able to communicate verbally and in email or written correspondence about these things, but if language is obfuscated to the point where it is not clear what that individual’s risks are (based on their sex), then it is only that individual who will be worse off for it. This point doesn’t need to be extrapolated to larger contexts for political power, but it should also not be ignored because of possible implications to larger gender identity questions.

Other than political gain for one team or the other, what is the argument for expanding the supreme Court?

I vowed to be done with it when it became subscription based, and now here I am. Kind of glad actually, been looking for an excuse for years as the site became more and more stale, unoriginal, and politics began to overwhelm everything. Maybe this is just how it has to be every decade or so.