SouthOfTheBorder

Transgender rights are similar to gay rights in that the essence of the idea is to overcome “denial of the authentic self” 
Straight people don’t need to understand being gay to accept gay people as equal in all things.  Similarly, straight people or gay people, don’t need to understand what’s it’s like to be transgender to accept transgender people as equal with attendant legal rights.
Many gay men have forgotten that being gay was classified as a mental illness until 1973.  Public opinion has evolved significantly re: gay rights in the last 50 years.  Transgender rights will the same as public opinion and legal rights evolve too.
This is a simple idea - you don’t need to understand someone else’s struggle or validate their identity for them to have the same rights as you do.  
All the confusion about this is usually related to one’s own confusion/vulnerability about identities, labels and the fear of uncertainty or the unknown.  It’s not an issue for those who are truly comfortable in their own skin because there is absolutely nothing to fear.
FYI - this has become a political issue in the US now because Americans are so easily manipulated.  Interesting to note that many indigenous groups & cultures have long had third-gendered (two-spirit) people and it’s accepted/celebrated with no big deal.  

Transgender rights are similar to gay rights in that the essence of the idea is to overcome “denial of the authentic self” 
Straight people don’t need to understand being gay to accept gay people as equal in all things.  Similarly, straight people or gay people, don’t need to understand what’s it’s like to be transgender to accept transgender people as equal with attendant legal rights.
Many gay men have forgotten that being gay was classified as a mental illness until 1973.  Public opinion has evolved significantly re: gay rights in the last 50 years.  Transgender rights will the same as public opinion and legal rights evolve too.
This is a simple idea - you don’t need to understand someone else’s struggle or validate their identity for them to have the same rights as you do.  
All the confusion about this is usually related to one’s own confusion/vulnerability about identities, labels and the fear of uncertainty or the unknown.  It’s not an issue for those who are truly comfortable in their own skin because there is absolutely nothing to fear.
FYI - this has become a political issue in the US now because Americans are so easily manipulated.  Interesting to note that many indigenous groups & cultures have long had third-gendered (two-spirit) people and it’s accepted/celebrated with no big deal.  

thank you for the first-person & recent observations re; Dominican Republic 
this forum is full of Nick Minaj cousins friends balls syndrome - lots of “opinions” based on no actual experience 

try the Michelangelo Hotel on 51st St.  Rooms are huge for nyc, adjacent to Hells Kitchen (lots of providers in the area) and hotel is big enough that nobody pays attention to coming & going. 

thank you for the first-person & recent observations re; Dominican Republic 
this forum is full of Nick Minaj cousins friends balls syndrome - lots of “opinions” based on no actual experience 

thank you for the first-person & recent observations re; Dominican Republic 
this forum is full of Nick Minaj cousins friends balls syndrome - lots of “opinions” based on no actual experience 

try the Michelangelo Hotel on 51st St.  Rooms are huge for nyc, adjacent to Hells Kitchen (lots of providers in the area) and hotel is big enough that nobody pays attention to coming & going. 

thank you for the first-person & recent observations re; Dominican Republic 
this forum is full of Nick Minaj cousins friends balls syndrome - lots of “opinions” based on no actual experience 

that’s like driving a car & pretending you don’t know it requires gas (or electricity).  technically possible, highly unlikely
the elephant in the room so to speak- or very *exotic* parrot 🦜  
disingenuous at best  - unless of course, the confusion is real

wrong - I was questioning the logic behind the thought process, or lack therof 
such as, why would people who proclaim to dislike Harry & Meghan so much, continue to opine about them ad nauseum in any context ?  
 


 

narcissists tend to think things are always about them - you’re just not that interesting, sorry. 
and, you don’t remember me because I didn’t participate in the politics forum here.  
I did however, support the demise of the political forum because it’s a toxic waste of time, regardless of political beliefs.  unless you’re a troll 
appears your ignore settings don’t work ?  
 

You mean something like “wokety wokety woke” ?  
 

I am a 74 year old retired corporate type who worked in New York for 30 years. I have been traveling to the Dominican Republic for 40 years . I am headed back in June , was there in February. I love the place! I never stay in resorts, I used do to gay or gay friendly hotels now I just use airbnb.
The DR may be the "8th poorest nation " but I have to question that - is it based on the poor distribution of income? It is, I do know, the wealthiest place in the Caribbean, it is the number one tourist destination in the area. It handled Covid very well and stayed open for travel. indeed, I was there several times during the period.
I have both American friends who live there and Dominicans. It is a very friendly place. I'm deeply shocked by some of the comments here. 
Safe? there are bad areas in every country and in every city. Don't go there. You don't have to stay in a resort - there is a burgeoning middle class and too many restaurants and entertainment venues to mention.
There are a few gay bars and one hustler bar. One can meet a gay Dominican or pick someone up - IT IS NOT HARD. I have made over 160 trips in my 40 years and have heard of people having trouble but I believe they would have had trouble anywhere. 
On my next trip I will be in an Airbnb - very affordable, see movies, go to a jazz club, eat at cheap place and white table cloth one, go to a friends new exhibit at a gallery and, yes, go to a gay bar. I prefer a long term friend and I have one who I will be with. I find the country amiable, the people friendly and sincere. It has its problems but it's not Haiti or Jamaica. Haiti is extremely dangerous a total no go. What I consistently hear about Jamaica is that you must stay in the resorts as it is very dangerous. That IS NOT THE SITUATION IN THE DR - not by a long shot.

you referenced “recreational” drugs, not drugs that have been decriminalized.  there’s a difference in terminology. recreational generally refers to legalized recreational marijuana in some states vs legalized medical use marijuana in others. 
and Portland doesn’t have an out-of-control crime wave anyway - it’s #62 on the list with 61 other cities with bigger problems.  you’re looking for the cause of a problem that doesn’t exist relative to current & comparative US crime trends. 

probably the same as the other 20 states/cities with legal recreational marijuana sale & consumption.  
It’s too widespread across the country to be a bigger problem in Portland than other places. 
 

correct - and  the media will prioritize sensational reporting to keep people watching. 
Example - subway crime in New York City.  About 4 million people ride subways daily (post pandemic) and crime is very low relative to overall ridership, yet it’s always sensationalized because it’s the largest US media market, almost all news organizations NYC based and it generates national interest.  However, when viewing New York City overall crime rate - it doesn’t even make it to the Top 20 US cities.  NYC comes in at number 42 for combined incidence of violent crime, while cities like Indianapolis, Tulsa & Anchorage are in Top 20, yet almost no national reporting in those cities because there is no interest. St. Louis and Detroit seem to get mentioned sometimes given they both top crime rate lists, yet almost no reporting of other problematic cities.
So, there are two factors at work.
Money - media organizations make more money when more people watch or read.  The key to more people is more sensational reporting.  Reporting on sensational crime in NYC is about as easy as it gets and ensures national headlines/interest. Nobody cares about similar sensational crimes in Anchorage.
Narrative - it confirms what many people already believe that certain cities like New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco & Portland are the most dangerous.  People like to get their beliefs confirmed in the media they consume.  When something is presented that is contrary to their beliefs, they usually go elsewhere.  It’s on both sides of the political divide and it is not a partisan issue - it’s human behavior in 2023 where consumers can select their media. 
FYI - Portland comes in at #62 in terms of incidence (per capita) violent crime.  The OP is likely safer visiting Portland than almost any other US city. Interesting what happens when you actually look at statistics and start to think.
 

correct - and  the media will prioritize sensational reporting to keep people watching. 
Example - subway crime in New York City.  About 4 million people ride subways daily (post pandemic) and crime is very low relative to overall ridership, yet it’s always sensationalized because it’s the largest US media market, almost all news organizations NYC based and it generates national interest.  However, when viewing New York City overall crime rate - it doesn’t even make it to the Top 20 US cities.  NYC comes in at number 42 for combined incidence of violent crime, while cities like Indianapolis, Tulsa & Anchorage are in Top 20, yet almost no national reporting in those cities because there is no interest. St. Louis and Detroit seem to get mentioned sometimes given they both top crime rate lists, yet almost no reporting of other problematic cities.
So, there are two factors at work.
Money - media organizations make more money when more people watch or read.  The key to more people is more sensational reporting.  Reporting on sensational crime in NYC is about as easy as it gets and ensures national headlines/interest. Nobody cares about similar sensational crimes in Anchorage.
Narrative - it confirms what many people already believe that certain cities like New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco & Portland are the most dangerous.  People like to get their beliefs confirmed in the media they consume.  When something is presented that is contrary to their beliefs, they usually go elsewhere.  It’s on both sides of the political divide and it is not a partisan issue - it’s human behavior in 2023 where consumers can select their media. 
FYI - Portland comes in at #62 in terms of incidence (per capita) violent crime.  The OP is likely safer visiting Portland than almost any other US city. Interesting what happens when you actually look at statistics and start to think.
 

Oracle ?
More like an *exotic* parrot w talking points 

 

that’s like driving a car & pretending you don’t know it requires gas (or electricity).  technically possible, highly unlikely
the elephant in the room so to speak- or very *exotic* parrot 🦜  
disingenuous at best  - unless of course, the confusion is real

that’s not how social media algorithms work.  An algorithm will feed you stories & information that you already agree with, or is predicted you will like, based upon the vast information they already have about all your internet habits.  The use of algorithms is to keep you engaged and online, preferably in an agitated state where you will continue high levels of engagement.
Social media algorithms do not give you contrary information to your beliefs or likes because that would lead to less engagement.  Less engagement means less time online which means less money for social media companies.  
Thus, whatever your beliefs and values, social media is engineered to reinforce those beliefs and feed you more to the point of radicalization.  It’s on both sides - not partisan. 
This is good - you have connected your distaste for H&M to a core belief which is offensive to you.  Most people don’t get that far.  
 
The question I’d ask is, why is this “cult of victimhood” an irritant for you ?  That too may be something that is not really the core issue.  
Usually if things don’t bother me in my day to day living, I shrug it off.  I can’t imagine a scenario in my daily life where the cult of victimhood could be a thing.  I’m more likely to be bothered by my neighbors who can’t park right and makes it more difficult for me in getting in/out of my garage - literally everyday & multiple times a day.  
I try not to devote any time or attention to things that cause negative intense feelings & there is nothing I can do to change it - because that’s a trap and the ultimate self-inflicted mind-fuck. 
Maybe you’re surrounded by victims ?  Or, have family history where victim behavior was common ?  Or, maybe it’s something else entirely ?  But, what it’s not is Harry & Meghan - it’s not like you’re going to run into them at a party and you will be subjected to them.  You’re likely choosing to consume information about them given you have total control over your media sources - the question is why consume that information if it’s so distasteful ?  That’s like drinking something that tastes awful. 

that’s not how social media algorithms work.  An algorithm will feed you stories & information that you already agree with, or is predicted you will like, based upon the vast information they already have about all your internet habits.  The use of algorithms is to keep you engaged and online, preferably in an agitated state where you will continue high levels of engagement.
Social media algorithms do not give you contrary information to your beliefs or likes because that would lead to less engagement.  Less engagement means less time online which means less money for social media companies.  
Thus, whatever your beliefs and values, social media is engineered to reinforce those beliefs and feed you more to the point of radicalization.  It’s on both sides - not partisan. 
This is good - you have connected your distaste for H&M to a core belief which is offensive to you.  Most people don’t get that far.  
 
The question I’d ask is, why is this “cult of victimhood” an irritant for you ?  That too may be something that is not really the core issue.  
Usually if things don’t bother me in my day to day living, I shrug it off.  I can’t imagine a scenario in my daily life where the cult of victimhood could be a thing.  I’m more likely to be bothered by my neighbors who can’t park right and makes it more difficult for me in getting in/out of my garage - literally everyday & multiple times a day.  
I try not to devote any time or attention to things that cause negative intense feelings & there is nothing I can do to change it - because that’s a trap and the ultimate self-inflicted mind-fuck. 
Maybe you’re surrounded by victims ?  Or, have family history where victim behavior was common ?  Or, maybe it’s something else entirely ?  But, what it’s not is Harry & Meghan - it’s not like you’re going to run into them at a party and you will be subjected to them.  You’re likely choosing to consume information about them given you have total control over your media sources - the question is why consume that information if it’s so distasteful ?  That’s like drinking something that tastes awful. 

that’s like driving a car & pretending you don’t know it requires gas (or electricity).  technically possible, highly unlikely
the elephant in the room so to speak- or very *exotic* parrot 🦜  
disingenuous at best  - unless of course, the confusion is real

that’s not how social media algorithms work.  An algorithm will feed you stories & information that you already agree with, or is predicted you will like, based upon the vast information they already have about all your internet habits.  The use of algorithms is to keep you engaged and online, preferably in an agitated state where you will continue high levels of engagement.
Social media algorithms do not give you contrary information to your beliefs or likes because that would lead to less engagement.  Less engagement means less time online which means less money for social media companies.  
Thus, whatever your beliefs and values, social media is engineered to reinforce those beliefs and feed you more to the point of radicalization.  It’s on both sides - not partisan. 
This is good - you have connected your distaste for H&M to a core belief which is offensive to you.  Most people don’t get that far.  
 
The question I’d ask is, why is this “cult of victimhood” an irritant for you ?  That too may be something that is not really the core issue.  
Usually if things don’t bother me in my day to day living, I shrug it off.  I can’t imagine a scenario in my daily life where the cult of victimhood could be a thing.  I’m more likely to be bothered by my neighbors who can’t park right and makes it more difficult for me in getting in/out of my garage - literally everyday & multiple times a day.  
I try not to devote any time or attention to things that cause negative intense feelings & there is nothing I can do to change it - because that’s a trap and the ultimate self-inflicted mind-fuck. 
Maybe you’re surrounded by victims ?  Or, have family history where victim behavior was common ?  Or, maybe it’s something else entirely ?  But, what it’s not is Harry & Meghan - it’s not like you’re going to run into them at a party and you will be subjected to them.  You’re likely choosing to consume information about them given you have total control over your media sources - the question is why consume that information if it’s so distasteful ?  That’s like drinking something that tastes awful. 

that’s like driving a car & pretending you don’t know it requires gas (or electricity).  technically possible, highly unlikely
the elephant in the room so to speak- or very *exotic* parrot 🦜  
disingenuous at best  - unless of course, the confusion is real

that’s not how social media algorithms work.  An algorithm will feed you stories & information that you already agree with, or is predicted you will like, based upon the vast information they already have about all your internet habits.  The use of algorithms is to keep you engaged and online, preferably in an agitated state where you will continue high levels of engagement.
Social media algorithms do not give you contrary information to your beliefs or likes because that would lead to less engagement.  Less engagement means less time online which means less money for social media companies.  
Thus, whatever your beliefs and values, social media is engineered to reinforce those beliefs and feed you more to the point of radicalization.  It’s on both sides - not partisan. 
This is good - you have connected your distaste for H&M to a core belief which is offensive to you.  Most people don’t get that far.  
 
The question I’d ask is, why is this “cult of victimhood” an irritant for you ?  That too may be something that is not really the core issue.  
Usually if things don’t bother me in my day to day living, I shrug it off.  I can’t imagine a scenario in my daily life where the cult of victimhood could be a thing.  I’m more likely to be bothered by my neighbors who can’t park right and makes it more difficult for me in getting in/out of my garage - literally everyday & multiple times a day.  
I try not to devote any time or attention to things that cause negative intense feelings & there is nothing I can do to change it - because that’s a trap and the ultimate self-inflicted mind-fuck. 
Maybe you’re surrounded by victims ?  Or, have family history where victim behavior was common ?  Or, maybe it’s something else entirely ?  But, what it’s not is Harry & Meghan - it’s not like you’re going to run into them at a party and you will be subjected to them.  You’re likely choosing to consume information about them given you have total control over your media sources - the question is why consume that information if it’s so distasteful ?  That’s like drinking something that tastes awful.