LGBTAI+ Questions and Discussion thread II: Make It Double

[Heliomance]

Wouldn't the discussion to halt politics be political in its nature as a tactic of avoiding as well? Isn't avoiding conversation political?

It would certainly be politic.

[Anarion]

It's okay. I've met Anarion a few times (two? Or three? Three, right?) and he's so far been nothing if not too accommodating.

Plus there's always your gun arms versus mine. 3:1, not good odds...



Hmm. We could make a meet of it? Dunno. Never heard of flagstaff, which sucks because that's a cool name.

Flagstaff is a city in Arizona. It's a tad far away, half a day's drive. Though we cound indeed host a meet. I'd be interested. That said, I'm not actually putting my mind to any sort of planning until after the new year.

And it was 3 SiuiS. Coffee shop, pony movie, and that rooftop in Berkeley where you swept me off my feet we chatted casually with Gaelbert for a couple hours.

I have to work today, 5AM-11AM. (Since I've been unable to find a job in law, I'm working retail.)

We're having an invasion tomorrow. (My wife and I live with her parents.) The invasion includes:

• My mother-in-law's brother, who is a jerk.
• My wife's brother, his wife, and their 2.5 year old daughter. I get along with my brother- and sister-in-law, but don't like kids. (I'm sure my niece will be fine once she becomes a human being...)
• My sister-in-law's mother and sister. Mother is OK, though can be annoying. Sister has some mental illness (not sure what) and often forgets to take her meds. When she's off her meds, she literally becomes delusional.

For New Year's, I've got a job interview Wednesday morning, then am coming home (it's 4 hours away) and will likely spend the night at home. In years past, the local gaming store has held an all-night party for New Years, but plans did not get worked out in time to have it this year. (I'm not crying too hard. I went last year and was kinda bored.)

2.5 year olds are old enough to interact. She may be quite shy in which case you're out of luck until she's older, but if she's affectionate, you coukd have fun with her. Try talking directly to her in greeting, simple words and a big smile, and see what reaction you get. I think they're fun.

Good luck with the interview. I'm guessing you're driving, which is too bad because planes sometimes serve free champaign if you're airborne on New Year's Day.

And yes I did just mention a 2.5 year old and alcohol right next to each other. Don't look at me like that.

[Kesnit]

2.5 year olds are old enough to interact. She may be quite shy in which case you're out of luck until she's older, but if she's affectionate, you coukd have fun with her. Try talking directly to her in greeting, simple words and a big smile, and see what reaction you get. I think they're fun.

She isn't really all that bad, especially since her parents and grandparents dote on her. Which means I don't have to deal with any of the really bad stuff, but can talk to her when she feels like acknowledging me. She isn't shy - at all!

Good luck with the interview. I'm guessing you're driving,

I'm driving down the night before, staying in a hotel, then doing the interview early New Years Eve.

[golentan]

Christmas plans? I'm making Jam today (because I'm out of christmas ideas and making something for the whole family is a bit of a tradition for me), then spending all day tomorrow with my family (mom, dad, sister, and the majority of my mom's branch of the tree)

[Anarion]

Christmas plans? I'm making Jam today (because I'm out of christmas ideas and making something for the whole family is a bit of a tradition for me), then spending all day tomorrow with my family (mom, dad, sister, and the majority of my mom's branch of the tree)

Going to one side of the family tonight for the Eve, then my parents are hosting the other side of the family for Christmas night tomorrow. I really ought to get dressed and ready now, but I've got a couple more hours left for fun first.

[SiuiS]

Interesting. I wonder what that's like, both Christmas and Hanukkah? I have an unfortunate WASP perspective bias, I've never even considered a set up where both were equally celebrated. It's always been a war of family culture whenever I thought about stuff like that. Which is silly, considering.

I've always be wary of the concept of "ally", because it's inherently divisive. "Ally" implies there's an enemy, and implies a kind of compact, explicit or implicit, to fight in a war of some sort. Also, it is a political notion, especially with the example given (by the way, with "NSW" I assume you mean the state in Australia, right?), and politics isn't a welcome topic in this forum.

{ scrubbed }

Being an ally is pretty simple in my experience. Don't tell me I'm going to hell, don't assault me, don't try to make my sex life illegal or keep me from getting a marriage license based on the sex of my partner, and don't try to justify the actions of people who do any of those things.

Aye.

That point about marriage is political so I will refrain from comment, but for all the others, it looks like being an ally and being a halfway decent and respectful human being isn't that much different. That's fine and I see no problem being an ally under that definition. But I don't think it is universally shared.

So I bungled it prior, but my statement of people being decent still stands. That is, we don't want special treatment. We want the same treatment. The default interaction with others is 'decent human being', but some folks believe certain properties allow you to treat the other person poorly. The reason the laundry list looks like 'we want you to be a decent human being' is because that's true. We want you to stop thinking "oh. It's okay, this person is gay so I don't have to be humane" is a valid concept.

But it is harder than that. You don't just mature and learn through sheer force of will.

I know two people who have done just that. I'm one of them.
It's about wanting it, not about difficulty.


Well, no. That's not right. My upbringing had a lot to do with it. Rather than being given rules to follow I was given tools to decide for myself what being a good person meant, and even if that was my goal. But it's never too late to give those tools. It just takes more resources.

You misspelled "uneven or insufficient access to resources". (IMO) Violence is merely a byproduct.

I understand what you mean, but no. Violence is the root of all conflict meaning, under every disagreement, every argument, every dynamic struggle, is the knowledge that if I really really want to win this particular struggle, damn the cost; I'll kill you or cripple you. That has nothing to do with uneven or insufficient resources. It's a simple cost:benefit analysis of exactly how much you've triggered my primate reflexes versus what I think I stand to lose.

That or the mods have been asleep at the wheel and there's a gold mine of infractions that one could count as a feather in one's hat by going back and trawling through old incarnations of the LGBTAIITP thread with an eye towards the report button.

Indeed. Although "no mod said anything yet" is not carte Blanche to keep doing it. They aren't omniscient. Except Rawhide, maybe. Being a computer and all.

Wouldn't the discussion to halt politics be political in its nature as a tactic of avoiding as well? Isn't avoiding conversation political?

No.

I can see where you're coming from here, but I was under the impression the enemy implied by "ally" was homophobia (or the other types of relevant bigotry).

The enemy is status quo. Everyone who goes along with the system propagates the system.

It's an antagonistic format but people stick to it because it's gotten results.

I didn't realise I was that transperant.

The benefits of being the majority are that you blend in. It's easier to recognize default settings from our perspective.

A bit came from seeing some stuff about the LGBTQ thread here, but not feeling like I should browse a safe space not intended for me (like, I consider myself a feminist, but I wouldn't go inserting myself into any safe spaces for women).

That's actually a good thing to bring up!

Browsing a safe space is cool. Online, I mean. It's educational as all get out, as long as you remember it's a safe space. I have one I found online for racial (specifically black) issues, and many times I've just sat down and shut up because, agree or disagree, it's a safe space. You don't walk into a room designed for people to vent and then get mad they're venting, even if that venting seems hurtful to you. That's the point; to vent safely without hurting anyone, you or them.

But recognize this; safe spaces select for certain things. Racial activism safe spaces self-select for a lot of "white people are stupid" for example. It's not personal. It's venting. It's an attempt to articulate in the dark, in the mirror, to get your ducks in a row.

We tend to forget this here. We forget the primary LGBTAI thread is for support and a safe space. I'll have to try to remember that myself.

I'm not sure I follow. I've been assuming there's a certain degree of space between being homophobic and being an ally. Are you saying you see it as a dichotomy?

Rhetorically, it can be viewed either way. If you've ever seen an ally telling an activist to not fight, to let this one go, that it's not really sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic, it's just one time and it makes sense in context, etc., it could be moderate action. Or it could be actively hindering, which is enemy activity. It's difficult to tell.

It would certainly be politic.

Ooh, dang! That's so elegant! Well done, hon.

Flagstaff is a city in Arizona. It's a tad far away, half a day's drive. Though we cound indeed host a meet. I'd be interested. That said, I'm not actually putting my mind to any sort of planning until after the new year.

Yeah. Mmm. Arizona desert~

And it was 3 SiuiS. Coffee shop, pony movie, and that rooftop in Berkeley where you swept me off my feet we chatted casually with Gaelbert for a couple hours.

I'm glad you'd phrase it that way even jokingly. Caught between both you and Gaelbert I felt both terribly dressed and not up to moral snuff. XD

2.5 year olds are old enough to interact. She may be quite shy in which case you're out of luck until she's older, but if she's affectionate, you coukd have fun with her. Try talking directly to her in greeting, simple words and a big smile, and see what reaction you get. I think they're fun.

This has taken on new magnitudes for me. My eyes are open and I see children now like I couldn't before. Remember, there's no guile there. Their smiles are the purest smiles. Their tears the purest frustrations or sorrows.

Two years they develop the higher capabilities, the abstractions for deception and saving face, but in general children are just so fun, it's amazing.

And yes I did just mention a 2.5 year old and alcohol right next to each other. Don't look at me like that.

I can't think of a parent that hasn't had to combine the two at some point.

I'm driving down the night before, staying in a hotel, then doing the interview early New Years Eve.

Och. So you celebrate the Gregorian year? I'm working, likely, but it's cool because New Years is a few months back for me.

[golentan]

Interesting. I wonder what that's like, both Christians and Hanukkah? I have an unfortunate WASP perspective bias, I've never even considered a set up where both were equally celebrated. It's always been a war of family culture whenever I thought about stuff like that. Which is silly, considering.

I've got friends from multicultural backgrounds, where the parents are different religions and aren't going to compromise their faith/traditions for their partners but also don't forcefeed it on family.

The fellow I'm thinking of celebrated both Christmas and Chanukah each year as a kid. The catholic parent ran christmas, the jewish parent ran Chanukah, nobody stepped on anyone's toes, everyone helped put out all the decorations for both, and gifts were exchanged by everyone for everything. Both parents exposed the kids to cultural traditions but didn't force anyone into anything: they wanted the kids to choose the faith that was right for them. My friend is now a rabbi, and his brother is atheist, sooo... I guess the catholics missed out on a recruitment opportunity.

[SiuiS]

Och. Christmas. Thanks for catching my typo, Golly. :)

[Anarion]

Interesting. I wonder what that's like, both Christians and Hanukkah? I have an unfortunate WASP perspective bias, I've never even considered a set up where both were equally celebrated. It's always been a war of family culture whenever I thought about stuff like that. Which is silly, considering.

Would you believe that gift-giving actually tends to be based on the family's means and what the parents think is fair for the overall holiday season? Because celebrating both generally just meant different ceremonies and different family get-togethers.

Also, being jewish in America automatically means you celebrate Christmas. Even if you don't buy your own tree, there are festivities in every store, every school, and most families get together on the day off because it's free.

Relevant stuff from a different civil issue; MLK's thoughts on allies. A moderate ally who insists that you fight softer, speak softer, take more time, wait for the right time to not rock the boat, is a worse enemy than even the most dogged and vile active opponents.

Anyone who doesn't pick a side in an issue of human rights is in fact already on a side and just doesn't want to change, and doesn't want culpability. But that's sort of bunk, isn't it? If you back down when homophobe A hassles queer B, then you've chosen to support homophobe A. That's not universal, and I'm not saying all things boil down to binary, but I've been there where I had to make a choice based on whether I had any support near me. Other people looking away, not wanting to get involved, only being willing to thank you for trying after the fight is over? That hurts. That gets personal. That's a choice.

Hey you read the MLK Birmingham jail letter! That's awesome! That's one of my favorite pieces of writing.

However, there is a distinction I'd make there that I think you're leaving out. If someone chooses not to stand up, I might be sad, perhaps disappointed, but I'm not going to say that they sided with the person hurling the insults. Inaction is often easier, it requires less of a person and sometimes people, even good ones, can't bring themselves to act every time. If they fail to be good enough, I want to encourage them to do more next time, to know that we can still be friends and that I appreciate their support in any form they can provide it.

That's different than the MLK letter where he discussed people who claimed to be "allies" but were actually giving advice not to act, in effect attempting a form of sabotage. That's a comparison of action to action: the choice to either stand with someone or to say something different and harmful. Imo, it's critically different in character from the choice between action and inaction.

I understand what you mean, but no. Violence is the root of all conflict meaning, under every disagreement, every argument, every dynamic struggle, is the knowledge that if I really really want to win this particular struggle, damn the cost; I'll kill you or cripple you. That has nothing to do with uneven or insufficient resources. It's a simple cost:benefit analysis of exactly how much you've triggered my primate reflexes versus what I think I stand to lose.

I think you two are talking about different things. Also, you're both right. Violence underlies all conflicts. SiuiS's statement above is basically true and the structuring of much of society is to make certain that an individual's resort to violence will harm them more than it helps them.

However, any individual conflict tends to exist because of scarce resources. If you could just have what you want and the other person could have what they want too, there wouldn't be a conflict in the first place.

The enemy is status quo. Everyone who goes along with the system propagates the system.

It's an antagonistic format but people stick to it because it's gotten results.

You should define "the system" here. I can't tell whether I agree with you or not.

Rhetorically, it can be viewed either way. If you've ever seen an ally telling an activist to not fight, to let this one go, that it's not really sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic, it's just one time and it makes sense in context, etc., it could be moderate action. Or it could be actively hindering, which is enemy activity. It's difficult to tell.

I think it comes down to how sure the individual is about things. For example, let's say I'm a 15 year old teenager grappling with my sexuality (which was a true thing once, long ago). I might be totally unsure what to do, whether I should tell anyone, express anything, wait, or goodness knows what. In that circumstance there's a place for advice from many perspectives including those who say "wait, be patient" as well as those who say to demand your rights now. It varies by the person, their risk in that circumstance and any number of other factors.

On the other hand, let's say that I'm that same teenager 4 years later, aged 19 in early college and people who claim to support me also urge me to keep it quiet, don't advertise that I'm looking for an unusual relationship, if I do find someone I shouldn't bring that person to any public events, that kind of thing. That's harmful, even if it comes from good intentions. Because it inherently contains the statement "Who you are is wrong" and reveals the person claiming to be a supporter is no such thing.

I'm glad you'd phrase it that way even jokingly. Caught between both you and Gaelbert I felt both terribly dressed and not up to moral snuff. XD

Och. So you celebrate the Gregorian year? I'm working, likely, but it's cool because New Years is a few months back for me.

Wait, which New Year are you celebrating?

[golentan]

Och. Christmas. Thanks for catching my typo, Golly. :)

Wasn't trying to be... It was obvious what you were asking, and I figured you wanted an answer rather than pedantry.

[SowZ]

Interesting. I wonder what that's like, both Christmas and Hanukkah? I have an unfortunate WASP perspective bias, I've never even considered a set up where both were equally celebrated. It's always been a war of family culture whenever I thought about stuff like that. Which is silly, considering.



Relevant stuff from a different civil issue; MLK's thoughts on allies. A moderate ally who insists that you fight softer, speak softer, take more time, wait for the right time to not rock the boat, is a worse enemy than even the most dogged and vile active opponents.

Anyone who doesn't pick a side in an issue of human rights is in fact already on a side and just doesn't want to change, and doesn't want culpability. But that's sort of bunk, isn't it? If you back down when homophobe A hassles queer B, then you've chosen to support homophobe A. That's not universal, and I'm not saying all things boil down to binary, but I've been there where I had to make a choice based on whether I had any support near me. Other people looking away, not wanting to get involved, only being willing to thank you for trying after the fight is over? That hurts. That gets personal. That's a choice.



Aye.



So I bungled it prior, but my statement of people being decent still stands. That is, we don't want special treatment. We want the same treatment. The default interaction with others is 'decent human being', but some folks believe certain properties allow you to treat the other person poorly. The reason the laundry list looks like 'we want you to be a decent human being' is because that's true. We want you to stop thinking "oh. It's okay, this person is gay so I don't have to be humane" is a valid concept.



I know two people who have done just that. I'm one of them.
It's about wanting it, not about difficulty.


Well, no. That's not right. My upbringing had a lot to do with it. Rather than being given rules to follow I was given tools to decide for myself what being a good person meant, and even if that was my goal. But it's never too late to give those tools. It just takes more resources.



I understand what you mean, but no. Violence is the root of all conflict meaning, under every disagreement, every argument, every dynamic struggle, is the knowledge that if I really really want to win this particular struggle, damn the cost; I'll kill you or cripple you. That has nothing to do with uneven or insufficient resources. It's a simple cost:benefit analysis of exactly how much you've triggered my primate reflexes versus what I think I stand to lose.



Indeed. Although "no mod said anything yet" is not carte Blanche to keep doing it. They aren't omniscient. Except Rawhide, maybe. Being a computer and all.



No.



The enemy is status quo. Everyone who goes along with the system propagates the system.

It's an antagonistic format but people stick to it because it's gotten results.



The benefits of being the majority are that you blend in. It's easier to recognize default settings from our perspective.



That's actually a good thing to bring up!

Browsing a safe space is cool. Online, I mean. It's educational as all get out, as long as you remember it's a safe space. I have one I found online for racial (specifically black) issues, and many times I've just sat down and shut up because, agree or disagree, it's a safe space. You don't walk into a room designed for people to vent and then get mad they're venting, even if that venting seems hurtful to you. That's the point; to vent safely without hurting anyone, you or them.

But recognize this; safe spaces select for certain things. Racial activism safe spaces self-select for a lot of "white people are stupid" for example. It's not personal. It's venting. It's an attempt to articulate in the dark, in the mirror, to get your ducks in a row.

We tend to forget this here. We forget the primary LGBTAI thread is for support and a safe space. I'll have to try to remember that myself.



Rhetorically, it can be viewed either way. If you've ever seen an ally telling an activist to not fight, to let this one go, that it's not really sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic, it's just one time and it makes sense in context, etc., it could be moderate action. Or it could be actively hindering, which is enemy activity. It's difficult to tell.



Ooh, dang! That's so elegant! Well done, hon.



Yeah. Mmm. Arizona desert~



I'm glad you'd phrase it that way even jokingly. Caught between both you and Gaelbert I felt both terribly dressed and not up to moral snuff. XD



This has taken on new magnitudes for me. My eyes are open and I see children now like I couldn't before. Remember, there's no guile there. Their smiles are the purest smiles. Their tears the purest frustrations or sorrows.

Two years they develop the higher capabilities, the abstractions for deception and saving face, but in general children are just so fun, it's amazing.



I can't think of a parent that hasn't had to combine the two at some point.



Och. So you celebrate the Gregorian year? I'm working, likely, but it's cool because New Years is a few months back for me.

If somebody was not given those tools, they are not just going to spontaneously learn how to think critically about moral issues like that. They will meet people, usually. Even being presented evidence by someone you don't know or stumbling across it on the internet is external intervention. If you were raised with a certain paradigm and not given the tools of critical thinking, and you have zero outside intervention, you aren't just going to wake up one day and decide to stop being racist.

[Jormengand]

So... Plans for the holidays? (Awkward change of subject)

Doing lots of work, wearing dresses and seeing how my sister and her boyfriend react (my mother is fine and my brothers haven't mentioned it - though I have found out that talking to your brother about breasts becomes really weird when you're a girl), doing lots of work, playing PARAGON, doing lots of work, playing D&D, doing lots of work, conveniently ignoring this "Christmas" thing that some people have going, doing lots of work, and did I mention doing lots of work?

Yeah - holidays aren't gonna be fun. But what else is new?

[Zurvan]

Just got home from the church. Had to serve as a acolyte because that priest always uses two acolytes and the other one did not show up. No harm done the other guy was kind of cute... Unholy thoughts during solemn celebration is always good thing... not hahaha. Some of my friends were there and that was nice.

Now that everybody ate too much I'm probably going to play mortal kombat with my cousins.

Doing lots of work, wearing dresses and seeing how my sister and her boyfriend react (my mother is fine and my brothers haven't mentioned it - though I have found out that talking to your brother about breasts becomes really weird when you're a girl), doing lots of work, playing PARAGON, doing lots of work, playing D&D, doing lots of work, conveniently ignoring this "Christmas" thing that some people have going, doing lots of work, and did I mention doing lots of work?

Yeah - holidays aren't gonna be fun. But what else is new?

You mean work WORK or work studying work?

[Mystic Muse]

This is a bizarre question.

Are there any conditions someone who is male might have that would require Estrogen/anti-androgens for treatment?

The other thing of course is I apparently have anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance. Anyone have any idea if they cover trans stuff?

[Anarion]

If you go to your insurance company website, there should be a document somewhere called "statement of coverage". It's basically a big book that lists out everything they do it don't cover.

[Jormengand]

You mean work WORK or work studying work?

Studying. Am doing one and a half times as many subjects as everyone else, so... work.

[noparlpf]

Interesting. I wonder what that's like, both Christmas and Hanukkah? I have an unfortunate WASP perspective bias, I've never even considered a set up where both were equally celebrated. It's always been a war of family culture whenever I thought about stuff like that. Which is silly, considering.

We always did Chanukah and not Christmas, but my siblings and I usually spend Christmas with my dad. We don't make all that big of a deal about either, though. It's a good year when we remember to light candles on six of the eight nights (about four is more typical), and we usually make a batch of latkes once or twice. And we don't bother with Christmas traditions either besides a small fake tree my dad sets up and a batch of eggnog.

Gonna delete some stuff now and stop typing before I say some stuff that's not board-appropriate.

[SiuiS]

Would you believe that gift-giving actually tends to be based on the family's means and what the parents think is fair for the overall holiday season? Because celebrating both generally just meant different ceremonies and different family get-togethers.

Also, being jewish in America automatically means you celebrate Christmas. Even if you don't buy your own tree, there are festivities in every store, every school, and most families get together on the day off because it's free.

I'm more interested in the celebrating, really. And yeah. Christmas is a secular holiday now.

Hey you read the MLK Birmingham jail letter! That's awesome! That's one of my favorite pieces of writing.

I did, and thanks. It have me context for stuff I had seen before.

However, there is a distinction I'd make there that I think you're leaving out. If someone chooses not to stand up, I might be sad, perhaps disappointed, but I'm not going to say that they sided with the person hurling the insults. Inaction is often easier, it requires less of a person and sometimes people, even good ones, can't bring themselves to act every time. If they fail to be good enough, I want to encourage them to do more next time, to know that we can still be friends and that I appreciate their support in any form they can provide it.

That's different than the MLK letter where he discussed people who claimed to be "allies" but were actually giving advice not to act, in effect attempting a form of sabotage. That's a comparison of action to action: the choice to either stand with someone or to say something different and harmful. Imo, it's critically different in character from the choice between action and inaction.

Aye. That's an important bit I couldn't nail down. I'm also generally assuming an adult; anyone below the age of majority is implicitly given leeway. That's a blind spot for me, and part of the binary nature of abstract thought. In general, "people" means adults in sound mind. The more specific you get the clunkier discussion gets; the more general, the more confusing. It's a balancing act.

I think you two are talking about different things. Also, you're both right. Violence underlies all conflicts. SiuiS's statement above is basically true and the structuring of much of society is to make certain that an individual's resort to violence will harm them more than it helps them.

However, any individual conflict tends to exist because of scarce resources. If you could just have what you want and the other person could have what they want too, there wouldn't be a conflict in the first place.

In abstract? Not really though. Some things, many of them which fall into 'not worth violence but might happen anyway' are abstract and can be had equally by both people.

You should define "the system" here. I can't tell whether I agree with you or not.

I'm not advocating either way, I simply understand the formula.

Defining the system would be problematic. It gets into issues of technicalities which leave out the wrong things or let in the wrong things. Abstract and concrete again. If you get the general idea, that is enough.

On the other hand, let's say that I'm that same teenager 4 years later, aged 19 in early college and people who claim to support me also urge me to keep it quiet, don't advertise that I'm looking for an unusual relationship, if I do find someone I shouldn't bring that person to any public events, that kind of thing. That's harmful, even if it comes from good intentions. Because it inherently contains the statement "Who you are is wrong" and reveals the person claiming to be a supporter is no such thing.

This is the one I mean, aye. The other is also balid, I just left it out because I couldn't figure how to include it without diluting my message into negligibility.

Wait, which New Year are you celebrating?

That's a religious discussion I'm afraid.

Wasn't trying to be... It was obvious what you were asking, and I figured you wanted an answer rather than pedantry.

I do appreciate that. Thank you. ^^

If somebody was not given those tools, they are not just going to spontaneously learn how to think critically about moral issues like that.

See here;

Well, no. That's not right. My upbringing had a lot to do with it. Rather than being given rules to follow I was given tools to decide for myself what being a good person meant, and even if that was my goal. But it's never too late to give those tools. It just takes more resources.

I should have said it's never too late to get those tools, but the point stands. Yes, if someone just sits there and does nothing they won't grow. They will not have moral understanding handed to them, they will not go out and find moral understanding, they certainly won't make heads or tails of it should the prior two somehow be wrong.

But a completely static human being is an outlier. They are not worth my consideration and serve only to dilute conversation. This is an instance of technically true but hardly useful information. I'm not going to give it the same weight as I would the standard person.

[golentan]

Just got home from the church. Had to serve as a acolyte because that priest always uses two acolytes and the other one did not show up. No harm done the other guy was kind of cute... Unholy thoughts during solemn celebration is always good thing... not LOL. Some of friends were there and that was nice.

Now that everybody ate too much I'm probably going to play mortal kombat with my cousins.

You mean work WORK or work studying work?

I object to the characterization of certain things in here.

[Kesnit]

The other thing of course is I apparently have anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance. Anyone have any idea if they cover trans stuff?

I had BCBS when I started transition, and they covered my hormones and doctor's visits.

That's a religious discussion I'm afraid.

I am going to guess Oct 31/Nov 1. If I am wrong, oops...

[Astrella]

This is a bizarre question.

Are there any conditions someone who is male might have that would require Estrogen/anti-androgens for treatment?

The other thing of course is I apparently have anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance. Anyone have any idea if they cover trans stuff?

Don't know about estrogen, but anti-androgens can be prescribed for prostate cancer.

[SowZ]

We always did Chanukah and not Christmas, but my siblings and I usually spend Christmas with my dad. We don't make all that big of a deal about either, though. It's a good year when we remember to light candles on six of the eight nights (about four is more typical), and we usually make a batch of latkes once or twice. And we don't bother with Christmas traditions either besides a small fake tree my dad sets up and a batch of eggnog.

Gonna delete some stuff now and stop typing before I say some stuff that's not board-appropriate.

I had a similar situation growing up, and am celebrating both holidays as well.

[Zurvan]

I object to the characterization of certain things in here.

*sigh* I don't get it... What have I done wrong this time?

[SowZ]

*sigh* I don't get it... What have I done wrong this time?

Honestly I saw nothing offensive. I can't speculate on what Golen found distasteful.

[Coidzor]

*sigh* I don't get it... What have I done wrong this time?

I mean, you probably shouldn't be thinking about League of Legends while you were doing that, but it's not the end of the world, so no worries about beating yourself up about having gotten distracted by thinking about the game.

[Zurvan]

I mean, you probably shouldn't be thinking about League of Legends while you were doing that, but it's not the end of the world, so no worries about beating yourself up about having gotten distracted by thinking about the game.

I really have no idea of what you guys are talking about.

[Sobol]

Christmas plans?

December 25 is a usual working day for me. I went to the cinema today to watch Into the Woods - and found the movie boring. The humorous bits weren't funny, the serious bits were lame, the acting and vocal abilities of the cast weren't even close to the original production with Bernadette Peters and others.

[SowZ]

I really have no idea of what you guys are talking about.

When you said LOL, he read that as League of Legends instead of Laugh Out Loud.

[Gwynfrid]

{ scrubbed }

Very interesting and valid point (as are Anarion's remarks in response), but I will refrain from pursuing that line of thought. A few days ago, I started to think that I might be overly cautious in my reading of the forum rules. However, I just realized, in a different context, that my reading was in fact not cautious enough. I should therefore allow for a wider margin from error, relative to the rules: That starts with my participation in discussions on the present thread.

[Asta Kask]

This is a bizarre question.

Are there any conditions someone who is male might have that would require Estrogen/anti-androgens for treatment?

The other thing of course is I apparently have anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance. Anyone have any idea if they cover trans stuff?

{ scrubbed }