Tesset

Literally the first hting that was said about this was "let's not get into the whole tipping thing because nothing new ever gets said" and here we are.

i am whichever the objectively best sexual orientation is That would be pansexual, solely because it allows you to give zero [bleep]s about giving [bleep]s. The ace/aro combination is a very close second since you can give zero [bleep]s about the whole [bleep]ing thing, and focus on more important things. You're objectively wrong ace aro is definitively better than pan in every way so boom.

Thank you, this was needed, lol.

Alright I wrote up a whole long thing and then refreshed to make sure no one replied this time, but I'll scrap it and say this instead. You're right here, we are in agreement. I just think it's a little... gross to have someone else say it who doesn't have those experiences. For me looking at my actions, it's okay to say "I can't use my problems as an excuse not to improve." But for someone else to say it about you isn't the same. And this is mostly true when the other person doesn't have the same experiences, and can't really offer any advice other than "get over it". But if you're someone who has those experiences and that advice, then you have more of a right to say "here's how to deal with your problems." Which is why community is so very important.

...What do my plans have to do with the topic at hand? I'm actually pretty alright with my situation at the moment, I don't see why I should ignore the fact that a lot of people I associate with are definitely not in as good a position. Deflecting the argument on to me isn't going to make the problem go away, and if you don't want to bother to understand it, that's on you. If happiness is that sort of head-in-the-sand blissful ignorance, I'll keep doing my own thing :P Jesus, I didn't even read this the first time through, but this. If your idea of happiness is to ignore all your problems and to ignore everyone else's, to pretend like everything is perfect until it actually is, then you've got a bad definition of happiness.

...What do my plans have to do with the topic at hand? I'm actually pretty alright with my situation at the moment, I don't see why I should ignore the fact that a lot of people I associate with are definitely not in as good a position. Deflecting the argument on to me isn't going to make the problem go away, and if you don't want to bother to understand it, that's on you. If happiness is that sort of head-in-the-sand blissful ignorance, I'll keep doing my own thing :P My core argument is basically that just about everybody (especially everybody ITT) has the ability to become happy if they want to. Yes, there are obstacles along the way, but that's just part of the process. I treat these problems the same way as I treat things like natural or economic disasters-- yes, they suck. But they're an inevitable part of my life. Time spent feeling negative about these things is time that could've been spent being productive and structuring my life in order to minimize the impact that these things have on my life. If you're happy, then the woes of the world instantly become irrelevant to you. They're still relevant to other people though, but only until the other people choose to live life the way I do-- which means taking full responsibility for their lives and their happiness. At which point, they're also happy and their problems also become irrelevant. You should ignore the fact that other people are in a bad position because clearly that's something that makes you unhappy and it's something that's beyond your control. You're responsible for your problems only, not theirs. If they want to be happy, they're capable of doing that without you. But you don't have to just ignore problems that occur to everyone! Here's a secret: as a society, we can fix them! We can approve same sex marriage! We can allow women to vote! We can free the slaves! We can do all these things that make things fairer and remove bullshit societal barriers that exist only as a result of prejudice! But we can't do that by not talking about them! We can't do that by saying "you don't exist" or "you don't matter". And if you're going to say "You don't exist" or "You don't matter", you are only going to help keep things unfair, and prolong that barrier to equality. Finding personal happiness and talking about societal problems aren't mutually exclusive and quite frankly if your personal happiness requires you to not talk about any problems ever, then it's not a personal happiness that I could ever consider good.

That's fine advice to give to individuals, but it's not in any way okay to just say "Well queer people should just work harder" and then sit back on your laurels like you've solved the problem of homophobia. It's not acceptable that entire groups should have to ever change the entirety of their life just to avoid hate. It's not in any way okay to pretend that everything is fine as long as there is one area in the US that accepts queer people. And when you argue that kind of shit, when you tell people that that's your solution, you're betraying your own internal biases. The desire for people to just shut up about their problems or their existence is prejudice just like the active bigots'. Bigots only get their power when people think a solution is to to just move away from it, for each and every case. Then they don't argue that it's wrong.

I'm not even talking about my [bleep]ing depression, thanks. I know where my depression stems from, it's not my orientation, and I've been working on it. That post only used me as an example in a couple of places. The thing I'm annoyed about is the fact that you're pretending the experiences of an entire group of people don't matter. Or that they aren't real. Which is exactly what society at large does to the ace community. Which is why we find value in the community - because it's somewhere that is accepting of those problems, that doesn't doubt they exist out of hand. The point is that some people feel that way their whole life. The point is that some people only ever feel attraction to 1 person, who they don't want to date, and it's confusing because either they don't understand what they're feeling, or they don't understand why they don't feel it more often. The point is that, even if your orientation mutates over time, there's value in finding a label that describes you while you need it.

Btw, I don't know if anyone has noticed this, but the copyright statement at the very bottom of the page still says 2013. This place is gonna be free to grab in just 68 years!

I'm not saying that! Jesus, look at the [bleep]ing link! Higher rates of depression are a result of social inequality and adolescent/adult bullying, not because "the statistics say I should be sad! :(:( :(:(" And depression isn't [bleep]ing "I'm unhappy with my life" anyway! I know you won't believe me, not any other person who tells you this, because you have this absolutist idea of what happiness that doesn't even encompass depression in the slightest, but depression is a pit from which "taking responsibility of your happiness" isn't a [bleep]ing option, because the chemicals in your brain don't produce the same way a neurotypical individual's does. You would have a similar time telling that to a meth addict who had burned out their happiness receptors. They can't. No amount of "taking charge" will change that. But that wasn't my point! My point was that straight, cis individuals are privileged and do not have inherently higher rates of homelessness, violence, discrimination, and depression! In case I need to spell it out for you, those are things that make people unhappy! So when you, as a non-queer person, say that people's orientations don't matter, you're ignoring all the increased difficulties that queerphobia causes! When you, as someone who has never been anything but straight and has never had to deal with the loneliness of being ace spectrum brings before discoveriing the community, refuse to listen to someone who has, you are adding to that cultural oppression in a small but not insignificant way. You can flap and screech about "happiness" all you want, but the fact is that, all other things held equal, straight people are statistically more likely to be "happy" than queer people. And your anecdote doesn't change that! And it's not the result of people telling queer people to be unhappy, it's the result of fewer opportunities being available to them! Why is that? Because straight people hold social power over queer people, because cis people hold power over trans people, because being queer makes doing things that make one happy harder because straight people have the power to deny them that! What would you say, Muggi, are the important things to being happy for most people? Would a satisfying job that pays your bills and lets you live comfortably be one of them? Did you know that it's still legal to fire someone for being gay in like 3/4 of the US? Because guess what, it's true! So if you get fired from your job for being gay, if you get kicked out of your house for being trans, do you think that would add to your [bleep]ing unhappiness in a significant way, in a way that's going to disrupt your magical process of "just be happy!!!! :) :) : :)"? Alright, if we've gotten to this point and you're still with me, if you understand and agree with me about all that, then let me tell you, as a queer individual, as male who is very not straight and intentionally, outwardly presents that way, soemtghing that helps with dealing with queerphobia. That thing is having a community of people supporting you, of people who have the same experiences and who are actively fighting to lessen straight privilege, so that queer people have all the same opportunities straight people do, and therefore aren't inherently disadvantaged by prejudice, just for who they are! That comes, here, in the form of labels and orientations! Identifying as homosexual isn't just a way of expressing who you're interested in! It's also a way of connecting with other people, in the same way that being a nerd is! You can find people who have the same experiences as you, and then have that connection! Straight people don't need that, because they have societal privilege! They don't have to talk about being fired for being straight, because they aren't! They don't have to band together to fight for the right to marry! Which, if you think about it, might be one reason why you don't feel orientations are necessary and I do, because you don't need them and I do! Alright, if you got that one, if you're okay there, we'll move on to the ace spectrum, which is kind of unique in the LGBTQIA+ community! You know why? Because it's a spectrum! Whoa! Mind blown yet? So when I say I'm gray romantic, that's important! It's important because it's a different experience to what an alloromantic (non aromantic spectrum (the aro spectrum is very similar to the ace spectrum and is interchangeable for this discussion especially because I'm part of both!)) person would experience. I'm not aromantic! But neither am I alloromantic! The way most people experience romance is fundamentally different to the way I do! I have a lot of similarities to the way aromantic people (don't) experience romance! I have some similarities to how alloromantic people experience it to, but they're the privileged group! Because I'm kind of like an aromantic, I have a lot of experiences I share with them! The alloromantic community doesn't relate, because they're the privileged group! They don't have those experiences, plus they're the ones causing those injustices! Just like straight people with queer people! So by identifying as gray romantic, I have a community! I have lots of communities, in fact, all fighting to stop some of the injustices I'm facing! I've got other gray romantic people! I've got the whole aromantic spectrum! I've got the queer community at large! All of those people are part of my identity! They all provide a community that is valuable to me, and let me tell you, I've derived a lot of happiness from the aromantic and asexual communities! They actively make me happier because I am part of them. And yes, the definition of gray romantic is inexact. It will be different for me than for another gray romantic. But that other gray romantic and I will have shared experiences that lead us to identifying the way we do. The other gray romantic is probably far more likely than I to want to be in a romantic relationship. And that's fine. There doesn't need to be a laundry list of exactly the things that need to be definitively true are in order to identify as gray romantic. The same is true for any orientation. A homosexual man can still be homosexual even if he thinks some women are pretty. The fact that he had a boner once when a woman touched him doesn't immediately shoot him into the bisexual category forever and for always. Even if he's not a gold star gay, it doesn't matter. He can be homosexual if that's the community he feels most strongly about, because it will provide him with the community he needs. And if he is a bear, then cool, that's important to him. As a straight person, you might not understand what that means. But that doesn't mean you should immediately disavow it. You shouldn't tell him "no you can't identify as this" because it's confusing to you. It's another community that provides more specific support to how he feels, and just because you don't have a full picture of what it means doesn't give you the right to dismiss it as unimportant to everyone. It's important to him, it's important to other bears, it matters. The ace community is very young and very small, and the aro community is even younger and smaller. There's a lot of things we're still figuring out. But one of the things that we have figured out, that we've figured out time and time again from individuals finding out about the asexuality spectrum and telling us so, is that it's valuable, and it's valuable to more people than just those who are strictly asexual. In the 15 years that the community has been around, our concepts have grown and shrunk, and they're slowly over time becoming more refined. But the only way to make that true is to encourage diversity in our community, to bring more voices in. To be more intersectional. So at the end of the day, if you want to say there's only 4 sexual orientations, I would suggest just one change. Instead of homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, and asexual, have it be homosexual, heterosxual, bisexual, and the asexual spectrum. That, at least, will be more accurate.

Also: This is a well documented fact. Queer individuals are more likely to have depression.

Privilege has nothing to do with happiness and everything to do with to do with power. It's easy to say orientations don't matter when you're straight because you don't have to think about your orientation the same way queer individuals do.

It's extremely easy and inconsequential to say "orientations don't matter" when you're straight.

My main gripe is probably this, that it seems like random groups on tumblr etc are coming up with different sexualities to appear to be special snowflakes, as opposed to academics drawing out well categorised sets that are more useful for classification. People are trying to come up with words to describe themselves, not words to give them special snowflake status or w/e bullshit you think it is. Also, those "special snowflake" orientations exist more as things to say to others who are also part of the ace community and therefore understand the experiences. They may not be useful classification for you, but it's very valuable to me to know if someone is quoiromantic/WTFromantic because I immediately have a very deep understanding of how they work with their closest relationships. And it's valuable to the people that identify that way because just knowing that other people feel that way helps validate your feelings, even when society at large likes to invalidate them. Nerd is also not a "scientific" classification, but that never stopped people from creating it, or from finding value in identifying as one. There's no academic definition of the fine line between nerd and geek and jock and hipster and whatever the [bleep] else, but you wouldn't tell someone off for being one of those. Or maybe you would, idk, but 1 that would make you an [wagon] and 2 who the [bleep] cares about your opinion anyway. Academic discussion doesn't make things real anyway. Things are real, and then people study it. Not the other way around. But is there a need to come up with terms like quoiromantic/sapiosexual/fraysexual/lithosexual/placiosexual to define your sexuality? Is such a level of detail necessary? These come across as merely preferences (e.g. y guy's brunettes vs blondes) rather than a sexual orientation. Yes.

same. looks like it's just the same thing as bisexual lol (Disclaimer: I'm not bi or pan, and so can only repeat what I've heard) The way I've heard it explained is that bi is attraction to all genders, but the way/level you're attracted to various genders/sexes can be different. Pan is attraction where gender doesn't have a significant impact. Or it's the binary/non-binary split as others have said. It really depends on who you're talking to and how they split them in their head. ~~ I think most everyone in the ace community realizes the problems in having very specific words for experiences. But then, most people in the community use one of 3 prefixes to describe their orientation, a-, gray, and demi-. Which is honestly not that many. But no one has come up with an alternative that lets people have the same depth of description and is easy and sticks. My main gripe is probably this, that it seems like random groups on tumblr etc are coming up with different sexualities to appear to be special snowflakes, as opposed to academics drawing out well categorised sets that are more useful for classification. People are trying to come up with words to describe themselves, not words to give them special snowflake status or w/e bullshit you think it is. Also, those "special snowflake" orientations exist more as things to say to others who are also part of the ace community and therefore understand the experiences. They may not be useful classification for you, but it's very valuable to me to know if someone is quoiromantic/WTFromantic because I immediately have a very deep understanding of how they work with their closest relationships. And it's valuable to the people that identify that way because just knowing that other people feel that way helps validate your feelings, even when society at large likes to invalidate them. Nerd is also not a "scientific" classification, but that never stopped people from creating it, or from finding value in identifying as one. There's no academic definition of the fine line between nerd and geek and jock and hipster and whatever the [bleep] else, but you wouldn't tell someone off for being one of those. Or maybe you would, idk, but 1 that would make you an [wagon] and 2 who the [bleep] cares about your opinion anyway. Academic discussion doesn't make things real anyway. Things are real, and then people study it. Not the other way around. Eh, unless you can't definitely define your preferences. I know of a woman who identifies as "mostly gay" with an implied "Somewhat bi". She's only ever dated women, only ever wanted to date women, and therefore identifies most strongly as a lesbian, but she still can be aesthetically attracted to a few men and so it's not so cut and dry. And it's way more complicated if you're not monosexual (attracted to only one gender). You're holding up hetero/homo as the level of definitive-ness to which everyone has to be able to define themselves. But a woman who is bi but has only ever had relationships with men because that's the only opportunity she's had is still bi. A polyamorous individual who has only ever been with 1 person at a time because they can't manage to get more personalities together is still polyarmorous. And I know those aren't perfect parallels, because I based them both on "can't find", but there are still similarities. Their orientations are still "entirely subjective." The poly person can just say "I wanted to sleep with all of them but I couldn't" and justify all their experiences. And they wouldn't be wrong. That's the important part of what I'm saying. An orientation isn't wrong just because there isn't "proof" or whatever. You're not in their head, which is where all the proof lies. ugh i didnt want to type this much, gdi

Ewww, it's so hard to read that on a small screen. Plus, I mean, it was only like 3 pages (sick burn tyler) (i know bro)

I had 9 notifications for this place, but when I clicked it, it decided I hadn't visited this thread since January 4th. So I had to click through all the pages, one by one because I am on mobile.

I've heard what sounds like someone breathing into/scratching a mic through my headphones 3 separate times tonight. It's very disconcerting. I hope it's just my headphones having a bad connection, which they've had for several months. (but they've never made that noise!)

Okay, I guess I was using the reciprocal of density, which is functionally equivalent for unit conversion. But based on what you're saying, my calculations are correct. That's a good point on the total mass, though. I'll try and check that somehow with the cardboard set, see what that's about, which should give me an idea.

Does anyone have any experience with 3d printing? My university has a printer available to students at a cost of $0.10 per gram, and I think it would be a fun project to design and print a Settlers of Catan set. I did some calculating of the cost of this, and I just wanted someone to tell me if $5 sounds about right. It seems really low to me. There's not a *lot* I would be printing, but it still seems like it would be higher for something as magic as 3d printing. [hide=My calculations] I'm using a density of .56549 in^3/g on the material that I calculated from http://store.makerbot.com/filament/abs. This is the actual material the school uses, so it should be accurate as long as I calced it right. It costs .10/g. 19 hexes - (hex sides)1 3/4"^2 * 3*sqrt(3)/2 = 7.96in^2 * 1/16" = 0.4975in^3 /.56549 in^3/g = 0.87977g - $0.09 ea - $1.67 6 frames - ~1.4925in^3 / .56549in^3/g = 2.6393g -$ 0.26 ea - $1.58 Robber baron - 1 1/4" * 5/8"^2 * pi = 1.5375in^3/.56549in^3/g = 2.71888g - $0.27 4 sets of: - 15 roads - 3/16" * 3/16" * 1" = 0.03515625in^3 / .56549in^3/g = 0.06217g - $.006 ea - $0.09 - 5 settlements - 1/2" * 3/8" * 7/16" = 0.08203125in^3/.56549in^3/g = 0.14506g - $0.015 ea - $0.07 - 4 cities - 3/4" * 3/8" * 3/8" + 3/8" * 3/8" * 3/8" = 0.15820in^3/.56549in^3/g = 0.27976g - $0.028 ea - $0.11 - Individual total - $0.27 4 Sets total - $1.08 Total - $4.60 This is just a ballpark, not a final figure or whatever. I'm just interested to know if that sounds about right. [/hide]

Taken them off because you can't wear shoes in the boxing arena. [hide] (I think they wear shoes in the boxing arena.) [/hide]

No, they're definitely hard at work. They've been working on sprites and backgrounds and shit, which is good and we'll need them. I haven't handed them anything to work on yet, which is mostly why no one else has done any engine coding.

There's been like 3 programs this semester that have been group assignments, but which I took the lead on because I had an idea of how it should work or whatever, and as a result I've ended up having to do all the work on all 3 assignments because I'm not good at writing code in a way that it can easily be handed off to someone else to work on. I'm working on the third assignment now. It's a game. I don't think I can get it done before it's due in a week and a half, but I think we'll have the same problem here. I'm really worried. If it weren't a group project, I would take the grade hit and just get *something* working, even if it didn't work well at all. But it's a group project, and I can't ruin other peoples' grades like that. I just wish I were a better software engineer. I'm a decent coder, at least for what experience I have, but I'm not good at designing the code. *sigh*

i can't recall what gameLast One To Post Wins. May it rest in hell.

Remember when this place used to do April Fool's jokes every year?