Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Ah, yes, the pervasive cry of older American men: "Social media is a cesspool of people who aren't afraid of me anymore."

Dr. Caelus wrote:Ah, yes, the pervasive cry of older American men: "Social media is a cesspool of people who aren't afraid of me anymore."

You are so terminally online, you have no idea how real life works anymore.

Social media brought many benefits to modern society, but at a steep price.
The algorithm.
We are all slaves to it one way or another and too many are turned INSANE by it.

This video is not for you. It's for the ones who wants to know more and are open minded, and don't see the world as "wings."

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Dr. Caelus wrote:Ah, yes, the pervasive cry of older American men: "Social media is a cesspool of people who aren't afraid of me anymore."

You are so terminally online, you have no idea how real life works anymore.

Cyber Bishop is complaining that no one is 'civil' online because they don't have to be afraid of violent retaliation from the people they're arguing with. I've heard that lament many, many times, but never once from a woman.

Because that's not civility, he misses, it's submission. He's effectively upset because, online, people treat him the same as everyone else.

Dr. Caelus wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Dr. Caelus wrote:Ah, yes, the pervasive cry of older American men: "Social media is a cesspool of people who aren't afraid of me anymore."

You are so terminally online, you have no idea how real life works anymore.

Cyber Bishop is complaining that no one is 'civil' online because they don't have to be afraid of violent retaliation from the people they're arguing with. I've heard that lament many, many times, but never once from a woman.

Because that's not civility, he misses, it's submission. He's effectively upset because, online, people treat him the same as everyone else.

I do have to agree with the fact that there's a huge difference between how we act behind a screen and how we act in person.

This classic is the perfect illustration of that:

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Dr. Caelus wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Dr. Caelus wrote:Ah, yes, the pervasive cry of older American men: "Social media is a cesspool of people who aren't afraid of me anymore."

You are so terminally online, you have no idea how real life works anymore.

Cyber Bishop is complaining that no one is 'civil' online because they don't have to be afraid of violent retaliation from the people they're arguing with. I've heard that lament many, many times, but never once from a woman.

Because that's not civility, he misses, it's submission. He's effectively upset because, online, people treat him the same as everyone else.

I do have to agree with the fact that there's a huge difference between how we act behind a screen and how we act in person.

I am aware of the online disinhibition effect. While I'm fairly certain I spend a lot less time online than you do, it used to be relevant to me professionally.

What I have come to realize since moving on from those days is that I never directly accounted for the reality that FtF interaction usually comes with an uneven balance of interpersonal power. For the person used to being on the high side of that imbalance, the online disinhibition effect would appear toxic, while for the other person it is empowering.

For certain people, the internet becomes a nightmare realm of people not deferring to them in the way they have come to expect, and the pillars of society appear to be crumbling because their innate status is not being properly recognized.

For others, it's a place where they cannot be shouted down, and where making threats ahainst you requires at least a bit of extra legwork from the person trying to intimidate you.

But it is true that for some the internet is a place to peddle conspiracy theories, clog everything with viral memes and youtube videos, bad-mouth marginalized groups, and try to leverage their own stupidity to feel superior.

So any given person's mileage may vary, I guess.

TFfan1 wrote:You are right, and I owe you an apology.

You don't owe me anything, I know you were acting out of passion and it's all good, I wish you all the best.

Dr. Caelus wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Dr. Caelus wrote:Ah, yes, the pervasive cry of older American men: "Social media is a cesspool of people who aren't afraid of me anymore."

You are so terminally online, you have no idea how real life works anymore.

Cyber Bishop is complaining that no one is 'civil' online because they don't have to be afraid of violent retaliation from the people they're arguing with. I've heard that lament many, many times, but never once from a woman.

Because that's not civility, he misses, it's submission. He's effectively upset because, online, people treat him the same as everyone else.

Wow I really did get under your skin (good) and your snarky comment is meant to bait me so f&^k it I'll bite and take your bait.
It has nothing top do with submission but simply respect, civility and most important accountability but so many people don't seem to know what that is anymore to be held accountable for their actions.
I have always kept to myself and left others alone IRL, didn't start crap and was as polite as possible thanks to my upbringing, but my generation faced their problems face to face and dealt with them accordingly, but the newer generations should always remember karma is a bitch and people WILL get what is coming to them.

It doesn't matter who it is online myself or others but people treat one another with zero respect, and your post proves just my point as you intentionally baited me which I said screw it I'll have some fun with this douche. I'll be the better person and walk away now so you can celebrate like a big boy "yays I bested him on teh intrawebs".

And also people aren't civil in RL either (which my main rant and issue is about to be honest), They act like dickbags left and right then they run or punk out in some fashion.

-Kanrabat- wrote:You are so terminally online, you have no idea how real life works anymore.

------------------------------------

I do have to agree with the fact that there's a huge difference between how we act behind a screen and how we act in person.

I am his "target" not you unfortunately but after reading his comments you are 100% correct.
And most people IRL say I am a lot nicer and more friendly online than in person, where most reverse that and try to act all badass online to get their "net cred" up there to fill their little egos and are actually whining little soy people offline, most seem to be liberals too go figure (I am neither side of the bird but am independent).

Whatever

Cyber Bishop wrote:Wow I really did get under your skin (good) and your snarky comment is meant to bait me so f&^k it I'll bite and take your bait.

...It doesn't matter who it is online myself or others but people treat one another with zero respect, and your post proves just my point as you intentionally baited me...

So, to be completely clear, you're pissy because the younger generations have no respect for other people, which you say is evident from my 'baiting' you, BUT you're ALSO pleased that your broad misanthropy, calls for a "purge" and a need to bring back "pain" to make people "civil" 'got under my skin' - complete with a "twisted" emojii to really reinforce your assertion that coming in to this thread with your children-must-die manifesto was an elaborately constructed exercise in trolling.

That about sums it up, right?

Edit: Sorry, I forgot you said you were going to do that thing where ypeople in your generation face their problems by just saying they win and leaving the room.

Fine.

Dr. Caelus wrote:

Cyber Bishop wrote:Wow I really did get under your skin (good) and your snarky comment is meant to bait me so f&^k it I'll bite and take your bait.

...It doesn't matter who it is online myself or others but people treat one another with zero respect, and your post proves just my point as you intentionally baited me...

So, to be completely clear, you're pissy because the younger generations have no respect for other people, which you say is evident from my 'baiting' you, BUT you're ALSO pleased that your broad misanthropy, calls for a "purge" and a need to bring back "pain" to make people "civil" 'got under my skin' - complete with a "twisted" emojii to really reinforce your assertion that coming in to this thread with your children-must-die manifesto was an elaborately constructed exercise in trolling.

That about sums it up, right?

In your mind sure run with it, also you must be a liberal seeing how you responded.
Accountability is the key, so few have it anymore. Ill stop there and walk off as I have nothing left to say.
Or in other terms I am finished with this.

william-james88 wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote: It is disgusting, because it is a lie. I care about the truth. The truth is there are two sexes and no such thing as gender outside of linguistics.

"The truth is there are officially 3 sexes according to today's science. I don't know why you are ignoring people who are intersex, an enveloping term related to people born with sex characteristics that are both male and female."



Intersex is not a third sex. It is a genetic disorder that still has the person genetically as male or female but with reproductive and sexual anatomy differences that don’t fit the usual male or female.
In other words they're the exception that proves the rule
I know. Under this definition I am intersex with Kallmans Syndrome. I am a male and have been since birth.

To follow your logic here this would mean that a person without a leg or with an extra finger is not human, because humans have two legs and 8 fingers and 2 thumbs. Of course this is absurd. The disorder proves the order's validity.

For everyone else, here's the thing - I used to really like Cyber Bishop; he was not the guy he keeps saying he was. He was mature, measured, and reasonable. Fairly witty back then too, as I recall.

Ten or fifteen years later, I've lived my own ups and downs, spent a long stretch away from this website, and spent a lot of time working out who and what is worth my time. I've grown up, and somehow he sure seems like he's done the opposite.

CB thinks that I'm trolling randomly for ****s and grins, because his head is so far up his sphincter that he can't see he that he has become the problem. While admitting he was trying to 'get under someone's skin' he's complaining that my lack of respect towards him is proof that I'm just a terrible person.

I'll admit, I'm not great, but at least even at my most cynical I'm not rooting for genocide.

CB's right that I've been disrespecting both him and Kanrabat, but he seems blind to the reality that it's because I just actually don't respect either of them as individuals anymore. Gauche to admit that it's personal, I'm sure - and possibly ban-worthy - but if I have to choose between "civil" and "honest" I'm going to choose honest.

CB has worked pretty hard at being dislikable with his whole 'I hate you, why don't you love me?' borderline shtick. So I don't think that really requires further explanation.

But Kanrabat... man... When you wade into one of these threads you generally have this strategy where you demand people explain things to you, then declare they're wrong because you didn't understand the explanation. I really don't know anyway to put it politely, so I'll say it flat out: you've weaponized your own stupidity.

I mean, it's a legit strategy to a point, I guess - I certainly see it a lot on TV and it seems to win votes. I don't know if you're actually incompetent or if you're really just dedicated enough to your beliefs that you're willing to play the fool. But that's why I haven't bothered with any serious back and forth with you, and have taken great delight in deflecting your cliches.

So, that's the difference. Plenty of people have come through here and expressed attitudes I would consider cringy or outright offensive, but no one but the two of you have actually worked at making themselves disrespectable.

And while the two of you might not be worth my time, maybe the people you're antagonizing are.

Cliff Jumper wrote:

william-james88 wrote:

Cliff Jumper wrote: It is disgusting, because it is a lie. I care about the truth. The truth is there are two sexes and no such thing as gender outside of linguistics.

"The truth is there are officially 3 sexes according to today's science. I don't know why you are ignoring people who are intersex, an enveloping term related to people born with sex characteristics that are both male and female."



Intersex is not a third sex. It is a genetic disorder that still has the person genetically as male or female but with reproductive and sexual anatomy differences that don’t fit the usual male or female.
In other words they're the exception that proves the rule
I know. Under this definition I am intersex with Kallmans Syndrome. I am a male and have been since birth.

To follow your logic here this would mean that a person without a leg or with an extra finger is not human, because humans have two legs and 8 fingers and 2 thumbs. Of course this is absurd. The disorder proves the order's validity.

Exactly that. "Intersex" people is not a 3rd gender. It's a deformity because the one afflicted are either male or female down to their own chromosomes.
HOWEVAH...
There's some bizarre and extremely rare case where the chromosomes doesn't match the gender of a person. There's a case of a XY chromosome woman who was fertile and gave birth to a XY daughter.
Warning, complicated words ahead:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190741/
Biology is a fascinating thing.

Regardless of everything, there is and will ever be only 2 genders. We are binary animals in a binary world. Anyone claiming otherwise are talking about PERSONALITIES. You can paint a house the color you want. But a house is still a house.

Isn't that like saying Transformers can only be Autobots or Decepticons?

bluecatcinema wrote:Isn't that like saying Transformers can only be Autobots or Decepticons?

Those are political affiliations.

That's no longer "apples and oranges", that's "apples and Playstations."

william-james88 wrote:

noctorro wrote:Personal opinion, I don't think sociopolitical and sexual preference stuff needs to be in a children's cartoon. And that a news outlet reports on this without being 40 years fan of the series is just fine by me.

Stick to Autobots fighting Decepticons while saving humans and other factions.

Anyone wanna tell him most G1 transformers are nonbinary with male personalities?

Kozmik_Pariah wrote:

william-james88 wrote:

noctorro wrote:Personal opinion, I don't think sociopolitical and sexual preference stuff needs to be in a children's cartoon. And that a news outlet reports on this without being 40 years fan of the series is just fine by me.

Stick to Autobots fighting Decepticons while saving humans and other factions.

Anyone wanna tell him most G1 transformers are nonbinary with male personalities?

In your head-canon.

Easily debunked with that G1 episode where the girls appear for the first time.
And especially in the Cyberverse show, where the ratio is pretty much 50/50.

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Kozmik_Pariah wrote:

william-james88 wrote:

noctorro wrote:Personal opinion, I don't think sociopolitical and sexual preference stuff needs to be in a children's cartoon. And that a news outlet reports on this without being 40 years fan of the series is just fine by me.

Stick to Autobots fighting Decepticons while saving humans and other factions.

Anyone wanna tell him most G1 transformers are nonbinary with male personalities?

In your head-canon.

Easily debunked with that G1 episode where the girls appear for the first time.
And especially in the Cyberverse show, where the ratio is pretty much 50/50.

They were probably going off this:

Maybe in the old Marvel-comics-verse, it's valid. Different universe, different rules.

Good ol'd multiverse. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Non-binary" ROBOT is a joke that write itself.
The correct term is GENDERLESS.

-Kanrabat- wrote:Maybe in the old Marvel-comics-verse, it's valid. Different universe, different rules.

Good ol'd multiverse. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Non-binary" ROBOT is a joke that write itself.
The correct term is GENDERLESS.

Tell that to the many people who identify as "Non-binary" in real life.

Moreover, why is it such a big deal to you and certain others what a fictional character chooses to call themselves? It's not hurting anyone, you know.

bluecatcinema wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:Maybe in the old Marvel-comics-verse, it's valid. Different universe, different rules.

Good ol'd multiverse. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Non-binary" ROBOT is a joke that write itself.
The correct term is GENDERLESS.

Tell that to the many people who identify as "Non-binary" in real life.

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought he was referring to the irony of robots being controlled by computers which use the binary 1 0 programming?

Moreover, why is it such a big deal to you and certain others what a fictional character chooses to call themselves? It's not hurting anyone, you know.

I'm not speaking for -Kanrabat-, and I've stated this in this thread before, but IMO some of those who are viewed as being "against transgender people" are not outright against them living their lives, but moreso against it being forced into our every day lives through social media, mainstream media, and various forms of entertainment. Like, we get it. You're a member of the LGBT community. Stop putting it on the news every 5 minutes. So when you say "it's not hurting anyone" that's not entirely true. Physically? Maybe not. But it makes life unnecessarily difficult to have this constantly on display.

I also understand there are some (I disagree with) who are hardcore closed-minded and just refuse to accept that there are people unlike them out there, for whatever the reason.

bluecatcinema wrote:Tell that to the many people who identify as "Non-binary" in real life.

Moreover, why is it such a big deal to you and certain others what a fictional character chooses to call themselves? It's not hurting anyone, you know.

You could "identify" as a flying squirrel from the planet Xanadu for all I care. Jump from trees to trees, eat berries while chirping happily, go nut! It's perfectly fine as long that you don't bother anyone and have fun.

It's when you'll try to FORCE ME to call you with the "zboing and blamo" pronouns that I'll take an issue. It's when you'll FORCE ME to praise you for "being a squirrel" that I'll get pissed.

Mental illnesses should be treated and be taken care of by professionals, not put on a pedestal and glorified like they do today. There's some sort of societal irresponsibility going on. And it show all over the net and even sometimes on the street.

As for "what's the big deal what a fictional character call themselves", it's all part of the normalisation and glorification of abnormal and FETISHIST behaviors. I don't mind that in a show geared for teens or adults. But in a show aimed at small children? That's disturbing.

-Kanrabat- wrote:It's when you'll try to FORCE ME to call you with the "zboing and blamo" pronouns that I'll take an issue. It's when you'll FORCE ME to praise you for "being a squirrel" that I'll get pissed.

Quick point of clarification - since you believe the speaker should face no repercussions for disrespecting someone by using pronouns contrary to their preferences, that does mean that everyone here is entitled to decide for themselves which pronouns to use when referring to you, right?

Dr. Caelus wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:It's when you'll try to FORCE ME to call you with the "zboing and blamo" pronouns that I'll take an issue. It's when you'll FORCE ME to praise you for "being a squirrel" that I'll get pissed.

Quick point of clarification - since you believe the speaker should face no repercussions for disrespecting someone by using pronouns contrary to their preferences, that does mean that everyone here is entitled to decide for themselves which pronouns to use when referring to you, right?

Exactly.
Respect is EARNED, not demanded.
It goes BOTH ways.

But when the special pronouns are ENFORCED BY LAW, it's just proof that we live in some sort of sick distopia. We Canadians are heading in that direction with Bill C-16 and the interdiction of protesting against drag shows FOR KIDS in Ontario (they conveniently leave out the "for kids" part in that CBC article.

-Kanrabat- wrote:

Dr. Caelus wrote:

-Kanrabat- wrote:It's when you'll try to FORCE ME to call you with the "zboing and blamo" pronouns that I'll take an issue. It's when you'll FORCE ME to praise you for "being a squirrel" that I'll get pissed.

Quick point of clarification - since you believe the speaker should face no repercussions for disrespecting someone by using pronouns contrary to their preferences, that does mean that everyone here is entitled to decide for themselves which pronouns to use when referring to you, right?

Exactly.

So you're actually completely fine with being referred to as he, she, or they?

-Kanrabat- wrote:Respect is EARNED, not demanded.
It goes BOTH ways.

Hmm...

Dr. Caelus wrote:So you're actually completely fine with being referred to as he, she, or they?

Call me what you want, I don't care. I know I'm ME and I don't depends on the opinions of others to validate my existence.

We lives in times so comfortable that we can worry about pointless and nonsensical things, to the point of being crazy. We are the mice in that utopia experiment. The reality check will come soon enough.