You seem to be confusing liberal democracy (a political system) with "capitalism" (an economic system) those aren't the same thing. There use to be some AnCaps (anarcho-capitalists/extreme libertarians) on the board, they would definitely disagree here too!
So when Madison the tour guide introduces herself and says "my pronouns are she/her" they are unwittingly serving some kind of unseen power?
So you agree there are not two fixed genders because not everyone fits fixedly within the two. Q: Who mentioned Caitlyn and Dylan? A: you.
I think the point of the op is that the “telling in advance” was mandatory and dictated by the employer. This complaint is against the employer (UF) not the students.
How do you know they are made to do that by the school? I'm not even sure they are employing these people, I dont think tour guides are paid.
Literally the most cis/het collection of people I've seen, only one dude is a he/they lol Meet Our Executive Board - FloridaCicerones
Actually wanting to control what college kids can say or don’t say, control their culture and what they believe seems more in line with communist doctrine. I don’t really get the pronoun thing and think it’s a bit unnecessary. But, I’m a middle aged white guy and admit a bit ignorant on their issue. I’ll readily listen. but I sure don’t get triggered when I see it at work. hot tip - middle aged guys who mostly had a life of gravy trying to change young adults culture is tilting at windmills. maybe our gov reps can focus on something more tangible like, at least discuss ideas on how not to be a world leader in obesity and gun deaths. Both issues will impact children more than them annoying their parents with tattoos and pronoun preferences.
You don't need "liberal democracy" to have "the rule of law" and "individual rights." "Liberal Democracy" is one type of system that offers that, and it's a great system, but it's not the only one. Typically when people discuss "Capitalist countries" they're talking about countries with rules and rights that protect the individual and the marginalized, but as a general rule prioritize people getting what they earn. It's not an absolute free-for-all where only the strong survive.
They are furthering the interests of people who want to tear down traditional institutions, even if they don't know it, yes.
No, everyone fits in one of the two categories, but some are harder to categorize due to genetic anomalies (even for me), but everyone more closely fits one or the other. That does not disprove that for 99% of people, it's clear which category they fall under, nor does it disprove that for even the vast majority of people who identify as anything not in line with their genitalia at birth, they fall into a clear category and that category is based on their genitalia at birth. Intersex is technically lumped in to the LGBTQIA+ movement, but it shouldn't be. It has nothing to do with it. All of these things are very different. Some of them involve sexual orientation, some of them involve gender dysphoria, some of them involve sexual values and behavior, and some of them involve genetic anomalies in the case of intersex.
No, I'm not saying that. I know you're intelligent enough to understand what I'm saying, so stop being dishonest.
What are the alternatives to liberal democracy that feature those things? Those are pretty much the features and appeal of liberal democracy! The alternatives typically are skeptical of those things for different reasons, some valid, some not so much IMO.
At best you are saying the official ambassadors of the university are apparently secretly being tasked with undermining UF as an institution.
Any country in the history of mankind with job specialization (allowing markets and trade), a system that locks up people for murder, and has rules curbing government authority has some elements of the rule of law, individual rights, and capitalism. It just has the potential to be more distant from the modern Western sense of these things, but these things are wrinkles in the grand scheme of comparing the rule of law to anarchy and Capitalism to Marxism.
To be fair, I dont know what you are saying at all specifically other than they are unwillingly doing something to undermine something else.
Begrudgingly or unknowingly. But yes, it's really that simple. Their intent is irrelevant, the outcome is the same.
Most states historically have a code of "laws" with prescribed punishments, state-sponsored/protected markets have been around longer than capitalism too. The rule of law generally means everyone in society is equally subject to the same laws, its an egalitarian belief, and egalitarianism is a pretty recent idea in human history.
