[NA]Berkeley bans "gendered" words[NA]

Status
Not open for further replies.
IK04 said:
Right triangles will soon be banned in Kalifornistan because the sides are not equal and the word "Right" is offensive.
Click to expand...
A 45-degree right triangle has two equal sides.

Other than that, not taking that bait! :nonod:
 
Berkeley likes mansplaining all of their goofy problems to the whole country. LOL. :)
 
They’ll rule that person-hole covers will be equilateral triangles and must be oriented with the point up.
 
Salty said:
Nope.
Click to expand...
yes it does.

Take an equilateral triangle with 5" legs for example. Split it into two right triangles, and the legs of each right triangle will be 2.5", 4.25" (prox), and 5". Drop the triangle (oriented tip to mid leg) thru the hole (against one 5" leg) and you have .75" to spare because you only need 4.25" of clearance and you have 5".

I see I missed a whole page of argument before I posted this, and this example has been posted before but here it is again... the only shape that works to keep the lid from falling through the hole is a circle. Turn the triangular "cover" in my photo up on edge and it falls right through.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20190719_081628895.jpg
    IMG_20190719_081628895.jpg
    99.6 KB · Views: 13
Last edited:
timwinters said:
yes it does.

Take an equilateral triangle with 5" legs for example. Split it into two right triangles, and the legs of each right triangle will be 2.5", 4.25" (prox), and 5". Drop the triangle (oriented tip to mid leg) thru the hole (against one 5" leg) and you have .75" to spare because you only need 4.25" of clearance and you have 5".

I see I missed a whole page of argument before I posted this, and this example has been posted before but here it is again... the only shape that works to keep the lid from falling through the hole is a circle. Turn the triangular "cover" in my photo up on edge and it falls right through.
Click to expand...


You'd think that as a pilot, they would be able to think 3 dimensionally.
 
I won’t say anymore here since I’m sure I’m at the limit of what the mods will allow. But anyone who thinks decisions like these are arbitrary and isolated doesn’t understand the world we live in. Once ideas are accepted “it’s just a city code, relax”, then by what reasoning will they be rejected later? The premise has been established. Govt or mobs can redefine language that obscures reality. “Oh but people won’t be punished for using the language, relax”. Yeah, right.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...r-pronouns-universal-credit-a8999176.html?amp
 
What about kids named Manfred, or Sheila? Or what about the meniscus or shells? What about menopause or manuals, or Mangos???? Shepards or Shelving?

All of those are highly offensive and should be changed immediately to maintain the appearance of impropriety...after all, words do have power.
 
I am now officially a member of the Huperson race.

Caramon13 said:
What about kids named Manfred, or Sheila? Or what about the meniscus or shells? What about menopause or manuals, or Mangos???? Shepards or Shelving?

All of those are highly offensive and should be changed immediately to maintain the appearance of impropriety...after all, words do have power.
Click to expand...

Not to mention all the masculine names:
San Diego, San Francisco...
 
Caramon13 said:
What about kids named Manfred, or Sheila? Or what about the meniscus or shells? What about menopause or manuals, or Mangos???? Shepards or Shelving?

All of those are highly offensive and should be changed immediately to maintain the appearance of impropriety...after all, words do have power.
Click to expand...
They will now be known as Theyfred and Theyila.
 
EdFred said:
Not to mention all the masculine names:
San Diego, San Francisco...
Click to expand...

These are easy, just add an s at the end of San. Then it will translate to "without" Diego and "without" Francisco. A few Diegos, Franciscos and Antonios may be offended, but they have foreign sounding names so they don't matter.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Hey I have an idea. Let’s talk about local blue laws around the country and the types that support them.
Click to expand...

I always thought it was funny that while Cali’s a nanny state in many ways, you can walk into a CVS at 3am on a Sunday and pick up a handle of Jack.
 
It's pretty obvious to me that blue laws, which prohibit or restrict some activities on Sunday, are pandering to Christianity and should therefore be declared unconstitutional and repealed. However the courts often don't see it this way. Also, many trade associations (e.g. liquor stores, car dealers) support these laws so they don't have to be open on Sunday. Fortunately for us, aviation does not seem to be affected very much.
 
Cooter said:
I won’t say anymore here since I’m sure I’m at the limit of what the mods will allow. But anyone who thinks decisions like these are arbitrary and isolated doesn’t understand the world we live in. Once ideas are accepted “it’s just a city code, relax”, then by what reasoning will they be rejected later? The premise has been established. Govt or mobs can redefine language that obscures reality. “Oh but people won’t be punished for using the language, relax”. Yeah, right.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/christian-doctor-trans-woman-sacked-gender-pronouns-universal-credit-a8999176.html?amp
Click to expand...
Predictions are easy. Correct predictions are hard.
 
I liked this thread better when it was about math. Me talking politics would be a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
 
Palmpilot said:
Santa Ana, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Monica, Santa Rosa...
Click to expand...

Those too, but in our current climate of, "penis bad, vagina good" those are still acceptable names.
 
Palmpilot said:
Predictions are easy. Correct predictions are hard.
Click to expand...
Don’t see how that interacts with my post, but ok sure, that’s obvious.
Taking jabs for attention is easy, articulating the basis for your beliefs is hard. Too bad you’re not willing to discuss it apart from the attention it draws.
 
One highly atypical town decides to convert their city code to gender-neutral terminology, and it's the end of civilization as we know it! So who exactly are the "alarmists"? :rofl:
 
Cooter said:
Don’t see how that interacts with my post, but ok sure, that’s obvious.
Taking jabs for attention is easy, articulating the basis for your beliefs is hard. Too bad you’re not willing to discuss it apart from the attention it draws.
Click to expand...
So now you want the conversation to be about my posting style?
 
Palmpilot said:
One highly atypical town decides to convert their city code to gender-neutral terminology, and it's the end of civilization as we know it! So who exactly are the "alarmists"? :rofl:
Click to expand...
Childish. You haven't interacted with anything meaningful, just silly adolescent responses.
Palmpilot said:
So now you want the conversation to be about my posting style?
Click to expand...
No, I just wanted an actual conversation.
 
Palmpilot said:
One highly atypical town decides to convert their city code to gender-neutral terminology, and it's the end of civilization as we know it! So who exactly are the "alarmists"? :rofl:
Click to expand...

The problem is that stuff "leaks" out. Prop 65 as an example. I have to fill out all sorts of BS paperwork because one of my customer's customer's customer's customer's customer might use the product in California.
 
EdFred said:
The problem is that stuff "leaks" out. Prop 65 as an example. I have to fill out all sorts of BS paperwork because one of my customer's customer's customer's customer's customer might use the product in California.
Click to expand...
This whole thread is giving me cancer
 
What bothers me is:
-when "feel good" initiatives that sound good on the surface (let's keep drinking water safe from toxic chemicals) ends up meaning that *every single restaurant and business in San Diego* has a stupid sign (like @EdFred said) warning me that the building I am in might potentially have a chemical that might potentially give me a cancer.. what good is that actually serving?

I really don't care what they call the hole in the ground, and it shows how far we've advanced as a society that we have the luxury to afford ourselves to worry about what these access ports are called

*Part of this also stems from a deficiency in the english language.. some languages have gender neutral ways of addressing nouns, etc., in Hungarian you can directly address someone without specifying their gender "ő jön ide" can be "he" or "she" .. the word " ő " can address either gender. You can't do that in english. Which sets you up for failure..
 
Tantalum said:
What bothers me is:
-when "feel good" initiatives that sound good on the surface (let's keep drinking water safe from toxic chemicals) ends up meaning that *every single restaurant and business in San Diego* has a stupid sign (like @EdFred said) warning me that the building I am in might potentially have a chemical that might potentially give me a cancer.. what good is that actually serving?
Click to expand...
It keeps sign shops and attorneys in business, and gives government employees more to do. Since they are busier, more are needed, thus expanding the size and reach of various regulatory fiefdoms. So, while I suppose "good" is in the eye of the beholder, it does effectively provide employment for many people.

Always look for the silver lining, right?
 
DaleB said:
it does effectively provide employment for many people
Click to expand...
I agree with most of your post, but I would take out "effectively" lol.. it provides employment, but not effective employment
 
Tantalum said:
I agree with most of your post, but I would take out "effectively" lol.. it provides employment, but not effective employment
Click to expand...
If the objective is to give people jobs with great retirement plans and expand the reach and influence of government, then yes, it's very highly effective. You're just looking at it from the taxpayER side, not the taxpayEE side.
 
Tantalum said:
You can't do that in english. Which sets you up for failure..
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, this made me laugh. I wouldn’t quite consider it a failure of the English language.

English can do it too though, we just dignify people with personhood with our pronouns. We could call gender non-conformers “it”, and the problem will be solved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top