7 ms·

I would expect you would be severely disappointed.

by mhurron 11y ago

crxgames 11y ago
Yep. News will be full of stories about Bruce Jenner's new tit job.
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  That's a bit disrespectful.
  - stephengillie 11y ago
    It's sad but true. Downvote for truth.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    But still accurate.
- sixQuarks 11y ago
  The sad thing is that most people in America know more about Bruce Jenner then they do Snowden.
  - rayiner 11y ago
    Can one reasonably believe that acceptance of transsexuals in the U.S. is a much bigger deal than NSA surveillance?
    - rosser 11y ago
      It's easier to understand, and easier to have a visceral, attention-grabbing (and, more importantly, attention-keeping) reaction to. That's what appears to matter most in American "news" reporting.
      - LordKano 11y ago
        I think that it's easier to sell soap with a Jenner story than a Snowden one. People are perfectly well capable of understanding that the government is reading all of their emails, text messages and facebook posts. The problem is that advertising dollars come from big corporations that make money off of the snooping and that well will run dry if anyone suspects that reporting will have a negative effect on next quarter's revenue. Instead of "Hey look! These Fortune 500 companies are getting paid millions of dollars to tell the government everything that you do.", we get "Hey look! This guy's doing something weird!"
      - rayiner 11y ago
        That's not what I asked. My question is, can a reasonable person believe that the acceptance of transexuals in mainstream American society is a more important and newsworthy concern than NSA surveillance?
        rosser 11y ago
        I know that's not exactly what you asked, but my response is relevant, if indirectly. That is to say, no, they can't. But mainstream news in the US isn't targeted at reasonable people — or, more strictly speaking, it isn't targeted at the reasonable parts of people. They're going for the visceral, emotional reaction from the audience, because that's what keeps people tuned in long enough to throw ads at their eyeballs.
        tatterdemalion 11y ago
        I think rayiner disagrees with you (and I think I do too). It is reasonable for someone to care more about the rights of trans people than to care about the surveillance statement.
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        There are two levels of importance. That which you as a person think is important, and that which truly is important to you.
        11y ago
    - pdeuchler 11y ago
      Nope. Not even in the slightest. There will always be those who are marginalized on the edge of society. That doesn't mean we shouldn't work to address those issues, but trying to reach some sort of utopia where everyone is perfectly included in society is delusional at best. On the other hand, the NSA revelations present a pretty clear path to totalitarianism for 100% of the population. It would be pretty hard to argue that such a result can be outweighed by much more that doesn't include some sort of large swath of death. I know from your past comments that you probably disagree with my "clear path" statement, so just to make sure... At it's absolute highest projection the transgender population is ~10% of the US. It would be extremely hard to argue that the NSA's overreach in power effects a smaller percentage than that, and even harder to argue that having a governmental organization with no accountability would be a positive influence on any portion of the population. And that's not even addressing the butterfly effect of so many of the NSA's programs. A quick thought experiment: The two issues might be more intertwined than you think... any society that accepts transgender/transsexual individuals must contain some semblance of privacy. The NSA is an active opponent of any kind of privacy we hope to have. Thus, you could draw a straight line from NSA abuse to the further acceptance of LGBTQ individuals in society. Edit: I hate calling out anon downvoters, but I'm gonna break my own rules and ask anyone to challenge my assumption that any kind of social reform takes precedence over the subversion of our fundamental political system and basis upon which we derive civil rights. (Pro tip: you can't, because civil rights are a priori a requirement of social reform)
      - tronracer 11y ago
        I don't see how a disorder[0] is intertwined with privacy. Are you referring to medical history? [0] Just in case someone thinks I'm making this up: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder
        aaaaabbbbbb 11y ago
        "Outing" yourself is a serious consideration for transpeople, because they have no idea how their families, social circles, or employers will respond once they are aware. Depending on where you live, the reaction could be anything from awkwardness, to ostracism, to physical violence. So there is a much greater need for them to maintain privacy and separate their normal lives" from their trans lives until (and if) they are ready to drop that bombshell. Imagine you are a closeted transperson, and you go online to talk with people about your issues. Then one day, some major web corporation decides that real names are the way to eliminate online trolling, and retroactively attaches your real name to one of the accounts you were using to maintain your presence. Now all of a sudden, your entire family learns of your condition, when you had no intention of telling them at that time. Worst case scenario, you're a teenager or other dependent that wasn't planning to tell your family until you could support yourself, and your parents decide to kick you out of the house, making you homeless, or force you into therapy and onto antidepressant medication that leads to your suicide. Because of these very justifiable fears, transpeople can be among the strongest proponents of privacy and online anonymity.
    - A_COMPUTER 11y ago
      In the abstract, absolutely. In these two specific instances, absolutely not, not if it were actually reasoned out. The publicity surrounding Jenner is a media phenomenon, and mostly symbolic. Reporting surrounding the specifics of the Patriot Act expiring and the USA Freedom Act passing are tangible and have wide consequences.
  - lazerwalker 11y ago
    I believe you mean Caitlyn Jenner.

I would expect you would be severely disappointed.

by mhurron 11y ago

I would expect you would be severely disappointed.

crxgames 11y ago

Yep. News will be full of stories about Bruce Jenner's new tit job.

matthewmacleod 11y ago
That's a bit disrespectful.
- stephengillie 11y ago
  It's sad but true. Downvote for truth.
- coldtea 11y ago
  But still accurate.
sixQuarks 11y ago
The sad thing is that most people in America know more about Bruce Jenner then they do Snowden.
- rayiner 11y ago
  Can one reasonably believe that acceptance of transsexuals in the U.S. is a much bigger deal than NSA surveillance?
  - rosser 11y ago
    It's easier to understand, and easier to have a visceral, attention-grabbing (and, more importantly, attention-keeping) reaction to. That's what appears to matter most in American "news" reporting.
    - LordKano 11y ago
      I think that it's easier to sell soap with a Jenner story than a Snowden one. People are perfectly well capable of understanding that the government is reading all of their emails, text messages and facebook posts. The problem is that advertising dollars come from big corporations that make money off of the snooping and that well will run dry if anyone suspects that reporting will have a negative effect on next quarter's revenue. Instead of "Hey look! These Fortune 500 companies are getting paid millions of dollars to tell the government everything that you do.", we get "Hey look! This guy's doing something weird!"
    - rayiner 11y ago
      That's not what I asked. My question is, can a reasonable person believe that the acceptance of transexuals in mainstream American society is a more important and newsworthy concern than NSA surveillance?
      - rosser 11y ago
        I know that's not exactly what you asked, but my response is relevant, if indirectly. That is to say, no, they can't. But mainstream news in the US isn't targeted at reasonable people — or, more strictly speaking, it isn't targeted at the reasonable parts of people. They're going for the visceral, emotional reaction from the audience, because that's what keeps people tuned in long enough to throw ads at their eyeballs.
        tatterdemalion 11y ago
        I think rayiner disagrees with you (and I think I do too). It is reasonable for someone to care more about the rights of trans people than to care about the surveillance statement.
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        There are two levels of importance. That which you as a person think is important, and that which truly is important to you.
      - 11y ago
  - pdeuchler 11y ago
    Nope. Not even in the slightest. There will always be those who are marginalized on the edge of society. That doesn't mean we shouldn't work to address those issues, but trying to reach some sort of utopia where everyone is perfectly included in society is delusional at best. On the other hand, the NSA revelations present a pretty clear path to totalitarianism for 100% of the population. It would be pretty hard to argue that such a result can be outweighed by much more that doesn't include some sort of large swath of death. I know from your past comments that you probably disagree with my "clear path" statement, so just to make sure... At it's absolute highest projection the transgender population is ~10% of the US. It would be extremely hard to argue that the NSA's overreach in power effects a smaller percentage than that, and even harder to argue that having a governmental organization with no accountability would be a positive influence on any portion of the population. And that's not even addressing the butterfly effect of so many of the NSA's programs. A quick thought experiment: The two issues might be more intertwined than you think... any society that accepts transgender/transsexual individuals must contain some semblance of privacy. The NSA is an active opponent of any kind of privacy we hope to have. Thus, you could draw a straight line from NSA abuse to the further acceptance of LGBTQ individuals in society. Edit: I hate calling out anon downvoters, but I'm gonna break my own rules and ask anyone to challenge my assumption that any kind of social reform takes precedence over the subversion of our fundamental political system and basis upon which we derive civil rights. (Pro tip: you can't, because civil rights are a priori a requirement of social reform)
    - tronracer 11y ago
      I don't see how a disorder[0] is intertwined with privacy. Are you referring to medical history? [0] Just in case someone thinks I'm making this up: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder
      - aaaaabbbbbb 11y ago
        "Outing" yourself is a serious consideration for transpeople, because they have no idea how their families, social circles, or employers will respond once they are aware. Depending on where you live, the reaction could be anything from awkwardness, to ostracism, to physical violence. So there is a much greater need for them to maintain privacy and separate their normal lives" from their trans lives until (and if) they are ready to drop that bombshell. Imagine you are a closeted transperson, and you go online to talk with people about your issues. Then one day, some major web corporation decides that real names are the way to eliminate online trolling, and retroactively attaches your real name to one of the accounts you were using to maintain your presence. Now all of a sudden, your entire family learns of your condition, when you had no intention of telling them at that time. Worst case scenario, you're a teenager or other dependent that wasn't planning to tell your family until you could support yourself, and your parents decide to kick you out of the house, making you homeless, or force you into therapy and onto antidepressant medication that leads to your suicide. Because of these very justifiable fears, transpeople can be among the strongest proponents of privacy and online anonymity.
  - A_COMPUTER 11y ago
    In the abstract, absolutely. In these two specific instances, absolutely not, not if it were actually reasoned out. The publicity surrounding Jenner is a media phenomenon, and mostly symbolic. Reporting surrounding the specifics of the Patriot Act expiring and the USA Freedom Act passing are tangible and have wide consequences.
- lazerwalker 11y ago
  I believe you mean Caitlyn Jenner.