Sounds fun, but honestly, all the problems in the last seven or eight years have done more to make Americans even MORE patriotic rather than degrade us morally or anything of that sort. I understand lots of people hate Obama for no reason and that might be bad for "unity" but I don't think Americans care or are stupid enough to let that get to them.
I'm sure there are Americans stupid enough to let that go to them, however they tend to also be stupid enough to be utterly hopeless at waging a civil war. There might be some isolated pockets of violence, but nothing that'll have any real effect unless Obama decides to drive down the streets of Dallas in a convertible with the top down.
I've already told Ryan that we don't want Kansas, or Missouri. I recommend you keep Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virigina too, for good measure. The other states aren't Real America anyway!
I don't know. The economic stuff was probably predictable enough to someone who was smart enough and paid attention. The guy clearly has a lot of desire to reclaim Alaska. Perhaps a little too much nostalgia for the "glory" days of Soviet Russia. Despite his statement that he does not dislike Americans he accuses us of moral degradation. I'd have to say I think his predictions are largely wishful thinking and a small attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
god should put (no relation) as his user title. FOR LAUGHS.
Also, this entire thesis from this Russian professor is stupid, he clearly doesn't understand the internal cultural and political divides within the country. The USSR broke apart the way it did because it was made up of several formerly independent kingdoms and states with distinct ethnicities, nationalities, religions, and other crap all at play, which is not at all analogous to the US states, other than perhaps the South vs. Everyone Else divide.
It pretty much seems like he just arbitrarily bunched states together, as everyone here noticed, and declared them to be under the influence of their nearest neighbor. I frankly don't see Canada or Mexico being able to exert much influence over their adjacent regions, except Canada over Alaska which makes infinitely more sense than Russia taking it since most Alaskans are white English speakers, regardless of Russia's previous ownership.
Argh why am I even justifying this nonsense with a response. I guess the real lesson here is that I should go to Russia and say all sorts of stupid fucking shit that is vaguely interesting and land myself a sweet university job.
Florida better not fall under Mexican influence. I want to be part of Atlantic America. Additionally, one would think Kansas would join the Texas Republic, not be claimed by Canada.
As far as I'm concerned Mexico can have that little strip of Southern states.
I was talking to a a friend of mine from California who also works in Hangzhou. She and I were debating which would be worse if we both went home in a few years, her returning to California to find the internet is still censored, or me returning to Iowa to find out I became a Canadian.
Tex-Mex already makes sense! It's completely different than authentic Mexican food, and most people I know who have had real Mexican food say they hate Tex-Mex in comparison. I say screw them, I love my Tex-mex and my cheap-ass Taco Bell. Om nom nom.
And yeah... in elementary school I always had to recite the Texas Pledge (I'll bet Ryan knows it too) along with the American Pledge of Allegiance, it goes "Honor the Texas Flag. I pledge allegiance to thee Texas, one and indivisible." While not quite accurate, it still shows that Texans are pretty proud of the state they live in. Whenever I see a U.S. flag here, there's almost always a Texas flag waving right next to it, at the same height. The State capitol building in Austin is the only Capitol building taller than the one in D.C. (and man is it beautiful when lit up at night!).
I mean, I love living in Texas, but I've been fortunate enough to live in the slightly more liberal cities of the state, and I have no desire to live in any of the small cities where everyone is racist and close-minded. In any case... yeah, I figure Texas would just become it's own country. The Republic of Texas! We've done it before, we could, er, do it again? Sure...
Half the kids who are conservative at my school are A-class idiots. They run around complaining how Obama has failed to successfully do anything during his presidency, which one has to remind them then that it hasn't started yet. They also love Palin and blame the Republicans losing florida on Katherine Harris, saying that she did the wrong thing for Democracy by not rigging the election again.
The Continuing Crisis
Australia's Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission announced plans in December to create a third official gender for government identification: "intersex," for transsexuals, whether or not they have had surgery. Immediately, activists from Sex and Gender Education Australia called the proposal inadequate, demanding a fourth gender, also, for people who feel that "gender" is either "undefinable" or subject to daily changes of attitude.
.... hmm... this is for GOVERNMENT IDENTIFICATION... so really, as much as I agree that gender is a construct and support people ridding themselves of it if they so choose, GOVERNMENT IDENTIFICATION is not necessarily the place for such an expression.
Although it is interesting that they use 'gender' as the identifier and not 'sex'. I would think they'd rather have them change that than give a fourth gender option.
I don't see why they need to have it on paperwork at all. It's not a question of your beliefs, it's a question of whether or not you have a y chromosome. The government is not asking you how you feel, they are asking into which of their categories you fit. If you wear contacts to change your eye color, you don't go into the DMV and demand that they list your preferred color on your license. People piss me off. Do whatever the hell you want, but don't be a pain in the ass when someone asks a question that has nothing to do with your life-style choices.
Yeah, and I'm with Andrew, I think it's weird that they ask for 'gender' instead of sex. Gender is what you consider yourself, disregarding sex organs... sex, on the other hand, doesn't really leave much room for argument. They should such change the forms to ask "sex" instead of "gender." Problem solved, right?
Supposedly there is a disproportionately high number of violent criminals who are xyy. I don't know if i really trust that study, it didn't seem to have an accurate sample of the general population from which those criminals originated to make such a comparison.
EDIT: Also, there was a ton of accompanying data that showed any extra violent tendencies were easily "unlearned". If it was ever really an influence in violent criminals at all, it was just to make already violent criminals a little more violent.
Yeah, I don't see why they can't categorize that under "intersex", it seems to describe it pretty well to me.
Intersex would denote someone who has both male and female characteristics.
Having no gender means that person thinks that gender is a useless categorization. It's different from intersex in that intersex individuals still identify male and female parts, while no gender people want a more fluid identity that doesn't have gender assignments.
I certainly see the appeal in this mindset, even if it wouldn't be accepted in mainstream culture. But Adam is quite right on this one: this is about government identification based on sex, not a survey of personal opinion. Well said, bro.
Don't believe the XYY thing about ending up in jail, Adam's right, it was a poorly done study. The Y chromosome has so few genes in it, an extra one doesn't really do anything.
Comments
I've already told Ryan that we don't want Kansas, or Missouri. I recommend you keep Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virigina too, for good measure. The other states aren't Real America anyway!
And I want Washington and Oregon.
I don't know. The economic stuff was probably predictable enough to someone who was smart enough and paid attention. The guy clearly has a lot of desire to reclaim Alaska. Perhaps a little too much nostalgia for the "glory" days of Soviet Russia. Despite his statement that he does not dislike Americans he accuses us of moral degradation. I'd have to say I think his predictions are largely wishful thinking and a small attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Also, this entire thesis from this Russian professor is stupid, he clearly doesn't understand the internal cultural and political divides within the country. The USSR broke apart the way it did because it was made up of several formerly independent kingdoms and states with distinct ethnicities, nationalities, religions, and other crap all at play, which is not at all analogous to the US states, other than perhaps the South vs. Everyone Else divide.
It pretty much seems like he just arbitrarily bunched states together, as everyone here noticed, and declared them to be under the influence of their nearest neighbor. I frankly don't see Canada or Mexico being able to exert much influence over their adjacent regions, except Canada over Alaska which makes infinitely more sense than Russia taking it since most Alaskans are white English speakers, regardless of Russia's previous ownership.
Argh why am I even justifying this nonsense with a response. I guess the real lesson here is that I should go to Russia and say all sorts of stupid fucking shit that is vaguely interesting and land myself a sweet university job.
I was talking to a a friend of mine from California who also works in Hangzhou. She and I were debating which would be worse if we both went home in a few years, her returning to California to find the internet is still censored, or me returning to Iowa to find out I became a Canadian.
And yeah... in elementary school I always had to recite the Texas Pledge (I'll bet Ryan knows it too) along with the American Pledge of Allegiance, it goes "Honor the Texas Flag. I pledge allegiance to thee Texas, one and indivisible." While not quite accurate, it still shows that Texans are pretty proud of the state they live in. Whenever I see a U.S. flag here, there's almost always a Texas flag waving right next to it, at the same height. The State capitol building in Austin is the only Capitol building taller than the one in D.C. (and man is it beautiful when lit up at night!).
I mean, I love living in Texas, but I've been fortunate enough to live in the slightly more liberal cities of the state, and I have no desire to live in any of the small cities where everyone is racist and close-minded. In any case... yeah, I figure Texas would just become it's own country. The Republic of Texas! We've done it before, we could, er, do it again? Sure...
From: http://www.newsoftheweird.com/archive/index.html
Although it is interesting that they use 'gender' as the identifier and not 'sex'. I would think they'd rather have them change that than give a fourth gender option.
EDIT: Also, there was a ton of accompanying data that showed any extra violent tendencies were easily "unlearned". If it was ever really an influence in violent criminals at all, it was just to make already violent criminals a little more violent.
Intersex would denote someone who has both male and female characteristics.
Having no gender means that person thinks that gender is a useless categorization. It's different from intersex in that intersex individuals still identify male and female parts, while no gender people want a more fluid identity that doesn't have gender assignments.
I certainly see the appeal in this mindset, even if it wouldn't be accepted in mainstream culture. But Adam is quite right on this one: this is about government identification based on sex, not a survey of personal opinion. Well said, bro.