Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard, pattern, level, or type; typical.
“normal room temperature; one’s normal weight; normal diplomatic relations.”
Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies.
Relating to or designating the normality of a solution.
definition 3 is not relevant, but i assume you’d agree that none of those definitions that were listed have specific statistical meanings
normal is not a useful statistical term: it does not mean average in any way - mean, median, mode, etc… normal is, in a social context, more likely to be interpreted to mean “Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies”, so i think you’d have to admit being described as “not normal” would piss some people off
Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard, pattern, level, or type; typical. “normal room temperature; one’s normal weight; normal diplomatic relations.”
What is a standard by your definition? What is a pattern? A norm? How are they defined?
Human beings don’t come in ‘standards.’ 105 men are born for every 100 women, does that mean women aren’t ‘standard’ or ‘normal’? You’re using an appeal to definition, still. That isn’t how we talk about people. There are more common things, but there is no ‘normal,’ ‘standard,’ etc. We have imposed standards, through a patriarchal system, which I feel Ursula K. Le Guin can explain far better than I.
So when I was born, there actually were only men. People were men. They all had one pronoun, his pronoun; so that’s who I am. I am the generic he, as in, “If anybody needs an abortion he will have to go to another state,” or “A writer knows which side his bread is buttered on.” That’s me, the writer, him. I am a man.
i like how you call a dictionary definition simply “my” definition… if you’d like to learn more about the english language, i suggest you use a freely available dictionary website
So just so we’re clear, in your chart here, every single age group, from Gen-Z to Traditionalists, has increased every year.
Huh, it’s almost like… these are numbers of openly LGBT people… and the more they are accepted, the more come out. And given that 1/5th of Gen-Z are already identifying that way, what will the number by in 2030?
Most Gen Z LGBT are bisexual, I’m not saying that it can’t be, I say its a interesting change when put into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT many do identify as bisexual wich in return makes actually Bisexual people looked down upon by LGBT people
Wich is literally what this entire post is about, being toxic and disrespectful to each other.
Oh and I didn’t come up with the definitions, they exist and I’m using them to prove my point, like such things are intended to be used
So being bisexual is ‘normal’ then, is it? Does that make you abnormal?
I say its a interesting change when put into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT many do identify as bisexual wich in return makes actually Bisexual people looked down upon by LGBT people
I’m bi and have never experienced that, nor has anyone bi that I know, but I also have to ask… do you know what the ‘B’ in ‘LGBT’ stands for?
into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT
The invented context of what? How do ‘LGBT people not listen to anyone not LGBT’? For what? What the hell are you talking about? Is this a ‘Gay Agenda’ thing?
So being bisexual is ‘normal’ then, is it? Does that make you abnormal?
No, you seem to still not get the point. BTW, big EW for assuming my sexuality.
I say its a interesting change when put into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT many do identify as bisexual wich in return makes actually Bisexual people looked down upon by LGBT people
I’m bi and have never experienced that, nor has anyone bi that I know, but I also have to ask… do you know what the ‘B’ in ‘LGBT’ stands for?
into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT
The invented context of what? How do ‘LGBT people not listen to anyone not LGBT’? For what? What the hell are you talking about? Is this a ‘Gay Agenda’ thing?
I honestly have no idea what your points are. I still have no idea what:
“I say its a interesting change when put into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT many do identify as bisexual wich in return makes actually Bisexual people looked down upon by LGBT people”
That means. I get there’s a newspaper article about what happened to that poor woman, and I don’t doubt it happened, it’s not as systemic as implied. Seriously, please slow down, and explain this:
the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT
What does this mean? Listen to straight people about what?
You don’t understand logical fallacies despite obviously being the type of guy who likes multiple videos a week about them from culture war youtubers with greek and latin usernames. You are actively engaging in doublethink (claiming something, presenting evidence about your own claim, running it back when the data YOU PROVIDED doesn’t support your claim while pretending to still have “logic” behind you), you are clearly torn up about an online argument, and your ability to read and think critically is clearly broken or undeveloped.
You have no concept of arguing in good faith, instead parroting things you’ve read or heard in similar conversations online (likely the aforementioned philosophy rant youtubers) that anyone over the age of 20 with an actual interest in these things has already heard tens of times. You’re kind of an idiot, judging by how proudly you linked your first google results. You have no concept of the difference between an article, a journal, and a study; sort of like a child who doesn’t see the difference between a chapter book and a graphic novel. Hell, I’m not sure you can read well at all, you certainly can’t quote concisely even on social media.
Removed by mod
definition 3 is not relevant, but i assume you’d agree that none of those definitions that were listed have specific statistical meanings
normal is not a useful statistical term: it does not mean average in any way - mean, median, mode, etc… normal is, in a social context, more likely to be interpreted to mean “Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies”, so i think you’d have to admit being described as “not normal” would piss some people off
please adjust your language
What is a standard by your definition? What is a pattern? A norm? How are they defined?
Human beings don’t come in ‘standards.’ 105 men are born for every 100 women, does that mean women aren’t ‘standard’ or ‘normal’? You’re using an appeal to definition, still. That isn’t how we talk about people. There are more common things, but there is no ‘normal,’ ‘standard,’ etc. We have imposed standards, through a patriarchal system, which I feel Ursula K. Le Guin can explain far better than I.
i like how you call a dictionary definition simply “my” definition… if you’d like to learn more about the english language, i suggest you use a freely available dictionary website
So just so we’re clear, in your chart here, every single age group, from Gen-Z to Traditionalists, has increased every year.
Huh, it’s almost like… these are numbers of openly LGBT people… and the more they are accepted, the more come out. And given that 1/5th of Gen-Z are already identifying that way, what will the number by in 2030?
You are using an appeal to definition and look absolutely childish.
Most Gen Z LGBT are bisexual, I’m not saying that it can’t be, I say its a interesting change when put into the context of the Internet “LGBT” people being toxic and don’t listen to anyone not LGBT many do identify as bisexual wich in return makes actually Bisexual people looked down upon by LGBT people
Wich is literally what this entire post is about, being toxic and disrespectful to each other.
Oh and I didn’t come up with the definitions, they exist and I’m using them to prove my point, like such things are intended to be used
So being bisexual is ‘normal’ then, is it? Does that make you abnormal?
I’m bi and have never experienced that, nor has anyone bi that I know, but I also have to ask… do you know what the ‘B’ in ‘LGBT’ stands for?
The
inventedcontext of what? How do ‘LGBT people not listen to anyone not LGBT’? For what? What the hell are you talking about? Is this a ‘Gay Agenda’ thing?No, you seem to still not get the point. BTW, big EW for assuming my sexuality.
Yeah shure. Inform yourself. https://metro.co.uk/2021/05/17/as-a-bisexual-i-face-prejudice-from-the-lesbian-community-14577723/
Yeah that’s just Ad hominem against me.
I honestly have no idea what your points are. I still have no idea what:
That means. I get there’s a newspaper article about what happened to that poor woman, and I don’t doubt it happened, it’s not as systemic as implied. Seriously, please slow down, and explain this:
What does this mean? Listen to straight people about what?
You don’t understand logical fallacies despite obviously being the type of guy who likes multiple videos a week about them from culture war youtubers with greek and latin usernames. You are actively engaging in doublethink (claiming something, presenting evidence about your own claim, running it back when the data YOU PROVIDED doesn’t support your claim while pretending to still have “logic” behind you), you are clearly torn up about an online argument, and your ability to read and think critically is clearly broken or undeveloped.
You have no concept of arguing in good faith, instead parroting things you’ve read or heard in similar conversations online (likely the aforementioned philosophy rant youtubers) that anyone over the age of 20 with an actual interest in these things has already heard tens of times. You’re kind of an idiot, judging by how proudly you linked your first google results. You have no concept of the difference between an article, a journal, and a study; sort of like a child who doesn’t see the difference between a chapter book and a graphic novel. Hell, I’m not sure you can read well at all, you certainly can’t quote concisely even on social media.
This is ad hominem.