Yes it is

I talked about the leader of the party of this senator, then linked a page about him.

What is going on with people here?

I said that the senator is part of a party led by a piece of shit. How does that mean they are the same person?

Are you trolling (or actively refusing to read)?

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Édouard_Philippe

Edouard Philippe (yes that’s who I was talking about) has been opposed to IVF for gay couples.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Édouard_Philippe

I didn’t have to dig very deep.

I clearly wasn’t talking about the speech, but the party and more specifically its leader.

France is the same as the US, just a few years behind.

This stupid senator is part of a party led by I anti-ecology, homophobic islamophobic dumbass, they just all want to do like Trump, just in their own time and version.

Opposing the US is just about taking advantage of the situation to say “look, I am reasonable, unlike them” and has nothing to do with what they think.

Think, talk, repeat until you reach a conclusion.

Ah yes, or the whole “using gender-neutral pronouns is a political move that shouldn’t be allowed” debacle

“Americans” are not an ethnicity. Talking about the culture of a country is nothing similar to attaching innate characteristics to a person based on origin/skin color/etc.

This does not require ethnicity at all.

If someone is discriminated because of an ethnicity they don’t actually have (let’s say a Mexican being targeted as an “arab”) should they not get compensation ?

According to your logic, you need ethnicity to give compensation which means that you require victims to have a specific ethnicity to be recognised, but it is absurd. What makes victims victims is what they went through, not the reason they suffered abuse.

And this doesn’t even apply to colonization as in this case most of the times the former colony is now a country, and as such you can give compensation to the country and its citizens, no ethnicity required.

Either way, ethnicity is not needed.

I think that being a colonizer is not something a government should be. So yes, definitely, such a treaty is bad.

A government should be treating people as equally as possible. Ethnicity only brings unnecessary division.

A creep writer and an absurdly obscure licence.

What could go wrong.

They’re not disagreeing, they’re just worried that it’s going too fast. Europe has been slowly going nazi but americans are a step further, and european politicians are worried that it will make people realize the fascisation of their societies.

And pretending to be against what’s happening in the US is reassuring the enlightened centrists.

Well, american culture making such a big deal about ethnicity even when “positive” did influence a lot.

I never understood why the N word is racist because of history, but then being black makes it fine to say. It’s still linked to a racist background, but it seems like americans consider that minorities can never be or do anything racist.

And I mean, in 99% of cases the concept of ethnicity is (or at least is used in a way that is) purely racist. Apart from a few studies on genetic specificities, it has no purpose at all, and definitely no purpose in daily lives and governments.

What’s weird is that no one with a sane mind would say that a woman saying “women are bitches and shouldn’t be able to work” isn’t misogynistic, but when it comes to racism people are making up exceptions left and right.

If you focus on ethnicity, chances are you are racist, no matter the justification you put behind it.

The magic of marketing

The reboot has a sort of coherence which makes it better to watch in order, but I don’t think it’s a big deal.

I would just say that Doctor Who is much more on the psychological thriller/horror side of science fiction than Star Trek.

I mean, it obviously depends on which star trek you like since the recent ones have been much much more into the horror/action/gore side than the older ones, if you liked the torture rape scenes of Discovery and the Alien plagiarism of SNW then Doctor Who might even seem mild in comparison, so I guess it depends on what you see Star Trek as.

Just imagine someone like you talking with you. How does it work?

I can’t even imagine that it would last more than two messages. It’s not a conversation if only one person is talking.

Seeking help is definitely the way to go as others have pointed out.

If you don’t care about others feeling hurt, well then just think about it rationally: you probably don’t like getting hurt, so you can understand that they don’t either and trying not to hurt others generally makes the world easier for everyone.

Now I would also say that aside of that, you should apologize to people you hurt. Not specifically expecting them to forgive you, but because it also logically makes more sense as it might make them feel less bad about your behaviour.

I would overall try to think about things more rationally than emotionally because it does look like your emotions are your main source of problem right now, and for example thinking that hurting people is going to make them improve is absurd.

And thinking rationally would let you realize what behaviors are not okay, and let you apologize/warn people about it even if you fail to control yourself. While people would still completely be entitled to distancing themselves from you if your behaviour hurts them, it might at least give them some insight that allows them to get less hurt. And once again, less hurt is generally positive.