Notices by 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org), page 14

@thatguyoverthere

How much of it was a disguise or pseudonym vs them actually identifying is not recorded. Their personal motivations wasnt really recorded as far as I know, in fact much of the details are lost to history.

@realcaseyrollins

@thatguyoverthere

Actually yes, John was the name she used when she was presenting as a man.

@realcaseyrollins

@realcaseyrollins

Im not sure what "I beleive I am a man" means.. She acted like a man, looked like a man, demanded people refer to her as a man, and people did.

Today man is split between sex (your dna) and gender (how you appear on the outside).. back then sex was related to your genitals mostly and gender was largely the same.. Unless you were talking about penises and vaginas you were talking about gender.

@realcaseyrollins

Huh there are tons of historic examples of people who were of one sex identifying as another sex... we have whole stories written about it.. Joan de arc is among the most famous.

Sooo just a reminder:

Dresses were the norm for boys in 100+ years ago, and the color pink was a color for boys as well.

Oh yea and in the 1700s it was normal fashion for men to wear high heels.

But hey, lets make up whatever fake history we want to make gender norms sound like they have always been the same and that "cross dressing" and "drag" are somehow new inventions.

#lgbt #lgbtq

@pmonks @QasimRashid

Please feel free to explain specifically where you think i went wrong. I deal with these sorts of taxes daily as the EVP of a company.

@opendna @pmonks @QasimRashid

The Dutch taxes on the highest tax bracket is also highly abusive. So not sure thats a great comparison.

@QasimRashid I mean, It was abusive and unfair, which is enough reason for me to give it a hard no... **no one** should be taked out of 94% of their income, regardless if they can survive it.

That said, I can pretty much garuntee the whole "0 of them left" and "0 of them went broke" is pure nonsense, you have a source for that?

@pmonks

Yes I am well aware how income tax works. But yes as you get father above the 200K bracket the closeryoull get to 94%. So yes you have tax rates abusively high for the rich that can approach 94%, if your rich enough you are effecitvely paying 94%.

@QasimRashid

@pmonks @opendna @QasimRashid

Saying it isnt abusive also doesnt make it so. Clearly this is my interpritstikn.

@thatguyoverthere

From what therapists told me anonymized therapy in the usa is illegal. Not sure of tbr details though.

@admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven My solution to the problem has always been free easy access and normalization of mental health... so id say if the problem has little to do with guns then id be more likely to be right.

@admitsWrongIfProven except it wasnt really a change in problem. We are addressing the same problem (all the killing) but by requiring a prerequsite of thr dicussion being to frame the same problem but only with sokutions that assune your opinions are correct going in.. its basically "i know im bias but lets have a discussion where we assume my biases are correct".. it isnt bad so much as it will never give you a honest world view if you cant accept the solutions to a problem exist outside your proposed solution.

Less guns means more people dead, thr fact that the shape of the holes change seem like a poor measure of success.

@admitsWrongIfProven @GabeLakmann

The things is i care about what is tbe most usefulnpath, full stop... you seem to care about the dicussion if and only if it frames guns as thr core problem. You literally go in with an incorrect and biased "fact" as a premis. That will never work.

@admitsWrongIfProven im just pointing out what you literally said in the message i responded to.

@icedquinn

Very true, the TSA no fly list is an amazing example of why mental health evaluations will certainly be abused.

@admitsWrongIfProven @antares @thatguyoverthere

@admitsWrongIfProven @antares @thatguyoverthere

You think, despite being disproven by example, that forcing mental health consequences means people with mental health issues wont be doing the thing.

You think the choice is between crazy people with guns/planes vs sane people.

The reality is the argument is treated people who are now mentally healthy flying/owning planes/guns vs untreated people.

It amazes me the republicans are out here trying to argue for better access to emntal health meanwhile democrats are trying to punish people who need access to mental health.

You got it all backwards man.

@admitsWrongIfProven @antares @thatguyoverthere

I woukd say pilotes with mental health issues should not be grounded, 100%. Science is about going with what the nunbers say even when it defies your biases and assumptions.

We know for a fact that the result of groubding people with mental health issues means more people with mental health issues wind up in the pilots seat.

Are you claiming we should enact policies that are known to objectively increase the number of mental health issues flying planes?

@antares @thatguyoverthere @admitsWrongIfProven

It amazes me this needs to be told to antigun folks at all

@thatguyoverthere @DutyBard @pj @rrb

Equivelant argument: vaccine deaths were 1000x more likely in countries where vaccines are legal.... yea the argument makes no sense when you really look at it