https://www.yahoo.com/news/dave-chappelle-says-wont-bending-101649815.html

No numerical signals; I disagree with him but he's just talking. I don't think it's a great way to improve his career--it wouldn't help him since I think he's incorrect--but he is allowed to talk about his ideas; I didn't see anything extremely offensive about his ideology in the article.

Here is an excerpt:

In "The Closer," Chappelle defended JK Rowling over her TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) comments, said, "gender is a fact" and described himself as "Team TERF." Chappelle has faced backlash in the past for his jokes about trans people.

My reaction to this is probably trivial and well-known, but it is: Lots of things are facts, including mental health disability and height. Even if someone is biologically female, why can't such a person "pretend to be male," if that is what it is according to those who reject this apparently highly demanded lifestyle?

As far as I know as a not-too-knowledgeable person, there is no way at this time to modify yourself so much that you change your DNA and stop being your birth gender biologically. You also can't change your height or your disability. Short/tall people, neurotypical/mentally ill people, and male/female people all cannot truly change these traits biologically, even if such traits can be addressed. I have no interest in "being/feeling female" in any way, but if there are (e.g.) 10 million people who want to build a movement around this idea, or 10 million people who want to identify as literally being Star Wars characters or Harry Potter characters, then why should the government restrict rights regarding this? It is true that the well-known bathroom rights issue doesn't make sense for my fictional characters example...but suppose lots of people wanted to demand access to amusement park rides where insufficient height is not a barrier to participating in the ride (I think I read/saw somewhere that there are height requirements for certain amusement park rides (??))...why shouldn't the political economy accept this demand and allow society to incorporate laws that reflect the demands of so many people?

In contrast to the abortion issue, there is no need to do limit the rights of others to enable transgender folks to do things the way that such folks might want to do things. Actually, if there were an issue where certain proposed transgender rights infringed on the rights of even one other person, I would side against transgender people in that case. That said, I see no reason to limit transgender bathroom use...modesty ought to be preservable enough in any bathroom, even for those uncomfortable with transgender people, whereas it could be seen as humiliating to tell someone who identifies as transgender that he/she cannot use a particular bathroom because of someone else's political will. (Relatedly, yes, I personally would accept the idea of an abortion ban if a replacement "freeze and save the fetus" type of procedure could be put in place.)

- - -

By the way, regarding the idea of "being summoned"...I guess it is technically true that I was mainly "demanded to answer" mainly by political leaders, not by all people who have ever appeared in the media. It is hard to keep it all straight sometimes for me. My "here's another certificate" post is intended partly as an expression of anger that I am out here talking and talking and "serving" in a way and not getting my freedom, which I should rightfully have, restored to me in a timely or reasonable matter at all...and partly as a criticism of people whom I seem to remember having demanded that I answer to them for speaking on the internet, and then not really accepting or responding to my very excellent responses to these cryptic demands.. Obviously, if my Hodge Conjecture proof had been wrong, it would have would up being an even more absurd and unreasonable challenge for me to overcome to get my freedom and go back to the real world, out of slavery, to do the important work I want to do to help the world and pursue my own goals for myself.

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:49:50 PM UTC-4, DV wrote:
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/dave-chappelle-says-wont-bending-101649815.html
>
> No numerical signals; I disagree with him but he's just talking. I don't think it's a great way to improve his career--it wouldn't help him since I think he's incorrect--but he is allowed to talk about his ideas; I didn't see anything extremely offensive about his ideology in the article.
>
> Here is an excerpt:
>
>
> In "The Closer," Chappelle defended JK Rowling over her TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) comments, said, "gender is a fact" and described himself as "Team TERF." Chappelle has faced backlash in the past for his jokes about trans people.
>
>
> My reaction to this is probably trivial and well-known, but it is: Lots of things are facts, including mental health disability and height. Even if someone is biologically female, why can't such a person "pretend to be male," if that is what it is according to those who reject this apparently highly demanded lifestyle?
>
> As far as I know as a not-too-knowledgeable person, there is no way at this time to modify yourself so much that you change your DNA and stop being your birth gender biologically. You also can't change your height or your disability. Short/tall people, neurotypical/mentally ill people, and male/female people all cannot truly change these traits biologically, even if such traits can be addressed. I have no interest in "being/feeling female" in any way, but if there are (e.g.) 10 million people who want to build a movement around this idea, or 10 million people who want to identify as literally being Star Wars characters or Harry Potter characters, then why should the government restrict rights regarding this? It is true that the well-known bathroom rights issue doesn't make sense for my fictional characters example...but suppose lots of people wanted to demand access to amusement park rides where insufficient height is not a barrier to participating in the ride (I think I read/saw somewhere that there are height requirements for certain amusement park rides (??))...why shouldn't the political economy accept this demand and allow society to incorporate laws that reflect the demands of so many people?
>
> In contrast to the abortion issue, there is no need to do limit the rights of others to enable transgender folks to do things the way that such folks might want to do things. Actually, if there were an issue where certain proposed transgender rights infringed on the rights of even one other person, I would side against transgender people in that case. That said, I see no reason to limit transgender bathroom use...modesty ought to be preservable enough in any bathroom, even for those uncomfortable with transgender people, whereas it could be seen as humiliating to tell someone who identifies as transgender that he/she cannot use a particular bathroom because of someone else's political will. (Relatedly, yes, I personally would accept the idea of an abortion ban if a replacement "freeze and save the fetus" type of procedure could be put in place.)
>
> - - -
>
> By the way, regarding the idea of "being summoned"...I guess it is technically true that I was mainly "demanded to answer" mainly by political leaders, not by all people who have ever appeared in the media. It is hard to keep it all straight sometimes for me. My "here's another certificate" post is intended partly as an expression of anger that I am out here talking and talking and "serving" in a way and not getting my freedom, which I should rightfully have, restored to me in a timely or reasonable matter at all...and partly as a criticism of people whom I seem to remember having demanded that I answer to them for speaking on the internet, and then not really accepting or responding to my very excellent responses to these cryptic demands.. Obviously, if my Hodge Conjecture proof had been wrong, it would have would up being an even more absurd and unreasonable challenge for me to overcome to get my freedom and go back to the real world, out of slavery, to do the important work I want to do to help the world and pursue my own goals for myself.

The word "even" was dropped from this post by the CIA.

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:51:16 PM UTC-4, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:49:50 PM UTC-4, DV wrote:
> > https://www.yahoo.com/news/dave-chappelle-says-wont-bending-101649815.html
> >
> > No numerical signals; I disagree with him but he's just talking. I don't think it's a great way to improve his career--it wouldn't help him since I think he's incorrect--but he is allowed to talk about his ideas; I didn't see anything extremely offensive about his ideology in the article.
> >
> > Here is an excerpt:
> >
> >
> > In "The Closer," Chappelle defended JK Rowling over her TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) comments, said, "gender is a fact" and described himself as "Team TERF." Chappelle has faced backlash in the past for his jokes about trans people.
> >
> >
> > My reaction to this is probably trivial and well-known, but it is: Lots of things are facts, including mental health disability and height. Even if someone is biologically female, why can't such a person "pretend to be male," if that is what it is according to those who reject this apparently highly demanded lifestyle?
> >
> > As far as I know as a not-too-knowledgeable person, there is no way at this time to modify yourself so much that you change your DNA and stop being your birth gender biologically. You also can't change your height or your disability. Short/tall people, neurotypical/mentally ill people, and male/female people all cannot truly change these traits biologically, even if such traits can be addressed. I have no interest in "being/feeling female" in any way, but if there are (e.g.) 10 million people who want to build a movement around this idea, or 10 million people who want to identify as literally being Star Wars characters or Harry Potter characters, then why should the government restrict rights regarding this? It is true that the well-known bathroom rights issue doesn't make sense for my fictional characters example...but suppose lots of people wanted to demand access to amusement park rides where insufficient height is not a barrier to participating in the ride (I think I read/saw somewhere that there are height requirements for certain amusement park rides (??))...why shouldn't the political economy accept this demand and allow society to incorporate laws that reflect the demands of so many people?
> >
> > In contrast to the abortion issue, there is no need to do limit the rights of others to enable transgender folks to do things the way that such folks might want to do things. Actually, if there were an issue where certain proposed transgender rights infringed on the rights of even one other person, I would side against transgender people in that case. That said, I see no reason to limit transgender bathroom use...modesty ought to be preservable enough in any bathroom, even for those uncomfortable with transgender people, whereas it could be seen as humiliating to tell someone who identifies as transgender that he/she cannot use a particular bathroom because of someone else's political will. (Relatedly, yes, I personally would accept the idea of an abortion ban if a replacement "freeze and save the fetus" type of procedure could be put in place.)
> >
> > - - -
> >
> > By the way, regarding the idea of "being summoned"...I guess it is technically true that I was mainly "demanded to answer" mainly by political leaders, not by all people who have ever appeared in the media. It is hard to keep it all straight sometimes for me. My "here's another certificate" post is intended partly as an expression of anger that I am out here talking and talking and "serving" in a way and not getting my freedom, which I should rightfully have, restored to me in a timely or reasonable matter at all...and partly as a criticism of people whom I seem to remember having demanded that I answer to them for speaking on the internet, and then not really accepting or responding to my very excellent responses to these cryptic demands. Obviously, if my Hodge Conjecture proof had been wrong, it would have would up being an even more absurd and unreasonable challenge for me to overcome to get my freedom and go back to the real world, out of slavery, to do the important work I want to do to help the world and pursue my own goals for myself.
> The word "even" was dropped from this post by the CIA.

I didn't say "do" either, and the word "manner" was changed to "matter." It's annoying. Google and the CIA both suck.