Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon

I like engaging with people on Twitter. I guess that makes me insane? i contain multitudes!

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@EmsTheKat @Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor He was *actually* threatening them though, why do you think that’s not the case? It doesn’t justify killing, but it justifies restraint. (And the question at hand is the severity of the restraint vs the threat).

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@HungSingMA @Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor No, I don’t think there’s any debate that he was harassing people in the subway.

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor Ok, no one is suggesting that. His behavior was at minimum physically threatening. Not sure anyone serious here would call it simply annoying

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor That’s not what we’re talking about. Rather, killing someone in self-defense isn’t controversial; it’s a question of whether the the threat rose to that level or not (and how severe the response)

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor Like what do you think my initial comment was about?

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor ??? Yes, I was reacting to that post bc I haven’t seen anyone make that argument before…

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor ??? He wasn’t simply annoying. The passengers on subway said they feared for their lives as well, no?

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor Like I haven’t seen anyone argue this was was such blatant, unnecessary excessive force; on the contrary my understanding is several other folks were helping restrain him as well

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor Nah…whether he’s guilty or not is a legal matter; but whether there was reasonable action taken or not is a separate question is the point

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Giggerton @BrandonLBradfor The OP is saying penny did the equivalent of shooting someone on the head 20 times; so it matters on account how severe the actions were to restrain the threat

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@AraucariaArauc1 @benryanwriter Can you elaborate? Are you talking about the edge cases, like intersex? Or do you mean to imply that people can change sex? Something else…

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@JamesSurowiecki Don’t they also have the largest gender gaps in the types of work though?

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@Kristolfan93 @wil_da_beast630 You don’t think there is a difference between subjective impressions and measurable / observable reality? Like there is difference between guessing how fast a car is going vs the fact there is a true speed they can be measured

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@FinnWilson9 @LittleMammith But that’s not an issue of male / female, it’s a question of whether the rules of that organization are fair or not. They are not disputing she’s female. They are trying to deal with a complicated question of fairness in context of the edge case

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@FinnWilson9 @LittleMammith We may be talking past each a bit: are you claiming intersex people are denied entry in sports today? That would be a problem could be solved by definitions. But that’s different than intersex people disagreeing with whether they should be in male or female competitions, IMO

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@FinnWilson9 @LittleMammith I mean, that not really a rights issue though, is it? Again, to the extent that’s a problem today, its probably more a function of a complicated situation / hard to get a fair resolution for all parties vs denying someone their rights.

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@FinnWilson9 @LittleMammith Why would it have an impact on peoples rights though? I assume this is about trans, but, I don’t see the connection.
Isn’t the argument more that gender and sex are not 1:1?

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@FinnWilson9 @LittleMammith It’s a circular point to claim that since existing definitions don’t cover edge cases, they need to be improved. That assumes 100% accuracy is a self-evident requirement, which I don’t think is necessarily true, particularly when a new definition makes things more confusing

[Carl the (pleasant) Curmudgeon @CurmudgeonCarl]

@FinnWilson9 @LittleMammith Sure, but my question / point is: why is more accuracy needed? We do just fine without 100% accuracy across many things. The chair example being the quintessential example.