So wait...is it her dancing like a cute anime girl for attention that you say isn't a choice, or is it demeaning women who make different choices than yours (hers) in the name of feminism that isn't a choice, or are you saying there are no choices and all behavior is culturally driven so out of our hands?

Doing crimes is a choice, and one not monopolized by minorities. It may be your best option in your particular circumstances, but it's never the only option, it is definitely a choice.

Ppft, I say. Then why don't people all act the same in a given culture?
Culture may make certain choices socially acceptable or not, or personally beneficial or not, but you are responsible for your choices. Yes, you really choose, cultural acceptance and consequences may be part of how you form your decision, or not, but they don't make your decisions, they inform them. If culture was the only deciding factor, we would still be living in the bronze age where a girl this age would have no viable choice but to have had a few children by now and would likely be dead from complications of childbirth. Fortunately, many have chosen to ignore or contradict cultural norms so we have progressed as a society.

From 1 jan 2016 the Dutch government has obliged shops and restaurants to charge 10 cents for any plastic bag they give out.

https://www.government.nl/topics/environment/ban-on-free-plastic-bags

This means plastic bag use in supermarkets, shops and restaurants has fallen by 70%. It has also triggered shops and restaurants to be more aware. Disposable napkins, cutlery etc are only given when asked. Part of this was that it is a cost to the companies and the government made it socially acceptable, even hip, to take these out.

The term "political correctness" originally came about as a disparaging way for assholes to describe not being an asshole.

“Political correctness is what right-wing bigots call what everybody else calls being polite”
-Iain M. Banks

Basically, while there are undoubtedly some idiots who take it too far, in general, I'm ok with it no longer being socially acceptable to call people niggers, queers and bitches.

The whole intellectually/vertically/gravitationally/whateverly challenged nonsense was invented as a parody of political correctness and in general, no-one actually uses those terms to describe anyone.

The problem is that people see the worst excesses of political correctness and assume that that's the whole point. It's like seeing one police shooting and deciding that law enforcement itself is a bad idea.

Honestly, I don't think I've ever met anyone who genuinely used the phrase "that's not politically correct" when talking to another human.

Oh, and even "politeness" isn't immune to politicisation. When I was younger, it was drilled into me that it was polite for a man to hold a door for a woman, or to pay for dinner on a date. It was considered polite for children to be seen and not heard. Good luck having an "apolitical" discussion about those topics.

Can I ask where you got your info on the rape crisis in Sweden exactly?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden

Last week the G&M reported that here in Canada 1 in 5 sexual assault claims are filed as baseless and never investigated. Back in 2005 Sweden started expanding their definition of rape and working on ways to avoid issues like we're having, such as people not reporting it and people who report it being ignored.

So you broaden the definition of rape to protect more people (the infirm was a major one for them), make it far more socially acceptable to report it and stop turning away victims and surprise surprise you get more reported rapes.

There are many times that statistics are used to misinform us or to cast a certain light on topic, "How to Lie with Statistics" is a great book for learning more.

Is there someone better educated on the physiological and psychological science of this that can explain why gender transition at that age is not child abuse?

Because from everything I understand about how complicated and frequently fraught with remorse and confusion that issue is for adults....how in the name of fuck can someone that young be mature enough to make that kind of life changing decision? (or indeed have it made for them)

Gender dysphoria is usually only diagnosed in adulthood and usually requires years of psychotherapy and adoption of the desired gender role before any respectable doctor in the UK would allow the transformative process of hormone therapy to begin. (let alone reassignment surgery)

The suicide rate for transitioned people is about 40% I'm told. This appears to mostly be a combination of depression brought on by using the idea of transition to avoid other underlying emotional problems and/or remorse in later years.

None of this is to say people should not transition. There is plenty of evidence to support many a diagnosis of dysphoria and many a success story. But the thing those happy transitions seem to have in common is a very through and mature understanding of themselves.

i.e. things a child is incapable of doing when their mind and personality are still developing.

IDK, the very idea deeply concerns me. Is she actually happy transitioned? Or has she had that idea re-enforced by her parents and such?

I have this hypothetical vision of them panicking at their little boy playing with dolls and tea sets and finding solace in the idea that they are just the wrong gender, instead of being "odd".

I know how silly that sounds, but especially in the south of the USA, gender transition is sometimes considered more socially acceptable than homosexuality and/or being an effeminate male (or so some people in the trans community tell me).

Am I just behind the times on this one? Seems like there would have to be some pretty fucking spectacular medical science to back it up where children that young are concerned...

I tend to view most religion as being a socially acceptable form of delusions... but they are mostly benign, some are even caring and empathetic people.

The ones that use their religion as a hammer to marginalize or harm others, I would rather they were put on a rocket and flown into the sun.

The gov't will always have varying degrees of "business" when it comes to things like this. And it will always change, because of varying interests. Private industry is largely responsible for why marijuana is illegal now. So you can't really treat gov't as this outside, independent authority, because it's going to respond according to enough voters or through lobbyists who are, effectively, us. Gov't is just caught in the middle between those various forces.

Shit changes though. Just look at cigarette smoking. Cigarettes used to be pretty harmless, until business got ahold of it and added all sorts of shit to it. Not only that, but it really wasn't that long ago that you pretty much had to smoke if you wanted to be socially accepted. Now the tables have turned. Smokers are pretty much shamed now. If you want to blame gov't for that, fine, but again, as I said before, we are the gov't. either through votes or through lobbyist influence.

You can look back at past gov't decisions and make judgements, sure, but that's hindsight. There's always going to be this dynamic of "Gov't should regulate X, but gov't shouldn't regulate Y" and every person has a funny way of evaluating such things and they don't always reflect reality, but some do.

But even when something is legalized like marijuana, there's always going to be some sort of regulation, like now, it's being regulated through taxation. Cigarette taxation is also a thing. A bartender acts like a regulator when they cut you off from drinking. Don't like it? don't drink there then.

And you are the guy who rapes nuns on Teusdays for peanut butter jelly sandwitches. (Hint: Lies aren't don't become true just because you type them out.)

You are welcome to continue placing your faith in the FDA, CDC, and AMA to tell you the truth. Good luck with that.

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4546409/mr-posey

You expect me to show you massive, expensive, controlled studies published exclusively by those who have a massive, vested, financial interest in supressing the very same studies. Genius. Pure genius.

These peer reviewers are regularly lying to each other, to themselves, to the publishers, and to the public to maintain funding. They have no credibility whatsoever. You are reading studies that are all fancied up to be all technical and socially acceptable and official and scientific and peer reviewed and above reproach... And they are all lies. Calculated lies to maintain the results expected by those who fund the studies.

I make reasonable allowances for what I will call a hero, I never made allowances for what's a legal right. I think one need not exercise one's rights in the most disruptive way possible to exorcize them. That said, if the restaurant owner in your scenario doesn't want to kick out open carry people for scaring 'families', that should be their right too, and then they're (the owner and the carrier) both slightly heroic.

In this case, if he's doing nothing illegal, the cops should go do something productive, not get violent because someone is guilty of contempt of cop, which is not a crime. They always say they're understaffed and there's too much crime to deal with, then why are 2 cops wasting so much time on someone legally not answering their questions or producing ID AND NOTHING ELSE WRONG? That seems impractical in the extreme.

There is a HUGE difference between behavior that, while allowed, is bound to scare some people and/or cause panic and behavior that simply annoys a public servant who's abusing their authority in the first place, not actually doing their job. No one can reasonably be afraid for their life of someone that won't answer their questions, nor is it a crime. No crowd has ever run in panic because a mime (or group of mimes) walked into it's midst....maybe in disgust, but not panic.

It is always appropriate, practical, socially accepted, and constructive to your life to tell any officer that you won't answer any question at all (including 'what's your name' if that's legal in your state) without written blanket immunity from the DA, notarized and codified by a judge, for any and all crimes you may have committed or may be committing...and not a word more without a good lawyer present. That's the advice both my father's and brother's high priced lawyers gave me, I'll take it.

Okay, so.. To start *deeep breath* ..

#1 - Conflating frequency & social norms is the first flaw in your weak sauce argument/opinion/whatever.

Norms are essentially social boundaries.
They ensure a certain level of compliance & conformity in a group.

The frequency of a behavior doesn't determine a norm.
Social acceptance does.

If informal rules are accepted & practiced by enough of the group, it's a (the) norm.

So..

#2 - Because police brutality is practiced & accepted enough.. it's the (a) norm.

A fact proven by comments like this from @lucky760..

A comment that illustrates those exact informal, unwritten rules of compliance.

Completely accepting that "well, of course cops on a powertrip clearly can't control themselves. What did you expect?".

Or comments from jerkfaces like Lantern53 (who is a cop), usually:
"Most people who get shot by the police deserved it."

Because in his child-like brain, only "bad guys get in trouble"..

So if a cop is beating you half (usually all the way) to death.
You must have done some "bad guy stuff" to start.

Which brings us to..

#3 - Your disgustingly ignorant, disingenuous denialism.

"Let's *scoff* pretend that everyday, for every brutal beating you hear about..

There's another even more violent murder..

That's ONLY 365 excessive force murders a year!

That's NOT representative of all 1 million police officers."

...@_@.. just ..@_@... Because:

A) As an "angry black man" who is distinctly enraged by police brutality..

I certainly don't need or appreciate you - a racially illiterate white male - pullin' the fuckin' race card.

"What if I made these generalizations about black people? Hmm? *pouty face* Woodn't da make you a wittle upset?"

THAT SHIT HAPPENS CONSTANTLY. Especially on the internet.

In fact, @BoneRemake has accused me of sellin' out or whatever because..

Most of my recent activity on this site has been a very pointed, belligerent direct response to the stupid shitty cuntbag comments of Videosift's resident racist jingoists.. @bobknight33 & @lantern53.

The latter of which is a police officer of 30 years.

B) Of course not EVERY SINGLE police officer or police interaction is violently excessive.

The point is - it's fucked up that videos like this appear on a regular basis. With little to no punishment for the officers involved.

Sure there are lots of good people in the world..

{Main Point} That means absolutely nothing when you're specifically illustrating & discussing the shitty, bad people in the world. {Main Point}


So yeah, i definitely don't need you and your patronizing AS FUCK white privilege apologist rhetoric to tell me..

"You know, not ALL cops are bad."

Yeah.. i know. Would you also like to tell me about how:

"Every interaction I've had with Law Enforcement has been benign and/or pleasant."

"I've never been followed around a store for fear I might steal something."

..-_-

There was a song with lyrics about reality being a ride on a bus and I just realized how ignorantly racist it is! God must truly have a sick sense of humor so if Jesus is real, he needs his meds pronto.

Is he man, is he god -- that long hair and those robes -- I gotta wonder if Jesus is transgender. It's more socially acceptable to be a half god than half woman. Just ask Kevin Sorbo.

Gods and half men of the bus. Also why you don't fuck with bus riders. That "I'm a Motherfucker" man from that infamous amber lamps video: Thor.

Every god rides a bus. My wife rides the metro, which is an even sicker version of a bus, the woman is a Goddess.

I can't stand this socially accepted abuse!

Where is People for Ethical Treatment of Robots!?

The public would think "Man that chick is desperate." But yeah, assaults on males from females are still very socially acceptable.

Anyhow, LMFAHS.

I'm always so surprised by people who are so disconnected from the person they'd consider their spouse that they really don't know it could go so badly.

Note to kiddies: If a girl starts telling you NO before you even ask the question, you should either A) stop or B) pretend to faint or C) say "Haha! Just kidding! I almost got you!"

The person deliberately laid down in front of a vehicle on the road (his decision).
While intelligent enough to know it wasn't good to be under a vehicle (core strategy of the scam).
He got run over because the 1 thing his disingenuous attempt relied on wasn't the case (drivers attention)

Should he receive immediate medical attention? Of course. Anything to the contrary would be unnecessarily cruel and thus shouldn't be socially acceptable.
Does his personal situation justify his actions? Justification's of right and wrong will be subjective, there is no irrefutable answer. (those gun comparisons focus on partial points, unbalanced and limited core concepts, look at 'THE' case, and judge 'THE' case. Stop misrepresenting things off limited values while disregarding other values that don't support your point [intelligence, selfish, inconsiderate, dishonest, theft via legal obligation])
Did he earn his reward? Fucking oath he did.

Someone chooses to unnecessarily risk their health to dishonestly take advantage of other parties, it happens. But to have so many normally sensible people saying stupid shit like the above, seriously people, acknowledge credit where credit is due. This doesn't make you a monster.

Disclaimer: I read first half of comments, then barely skimmed the rest once it got stupid. @Tusker commented twice, nailed it both times.