Explain-Math

The Mathematician's dilemma is the same as the Autistic: Why the fuck don't people apply more rigorous logic/proof to their thought process in order to achieve Unity?

From Unity you have the greatest point of strength.

Example: LGBTIQ or LGBT+

Why the fuck don't they utilize proper set theory and realize they simply want: ABG (Anti-Binary-Gender)?

The more time you spend explaining a fucking acronym and allowing it to be beaten like an unloved dog is what shits everyone off about any 'social movement'.

The argument is basically Binary Gender vs. Anti-Binary Gender.

BG vs ABG P vs NP

It's all about fucking communicating the problem in order to share identity (N = 1 or B = 1).

How would YOU explain mathematics in the simplest form possible to the simplest person possible so they stop shitting in our collective cornflakes?

Just because you're a guy who wants to fuck other guys in the ass or a guy who wants to take female hormones and dress up like a woman doesn't mean you don't believe there are two genders.

Then your argument is with the word 'gender' or assigned genital fetal chromosome development.

Gender is a word that the BLT sandwiches have taken to mean both sexual preference and physical gender.

Anti-Binary Gender is essentially non-straight male/female. Essentially the procreational preference.

Anti-Procreation Sexuality is more accurate but I doubt has the same public appeal.

>I doubt has the same public appeal
None of what you're suggesting has public appeal. The realistically best thing faggots can do is not try to campaign for anything in the first place. There aren't any rights they don't have today and they can't get into legal trouble even by openly pushing their faggotry on everyone else. Protesting will at best get them nothing and more likely will just make people who wouldn't have cared start to not like them because they wouldn't mind their own business and had to put on a dildo fellating parade in front of an elementary school.

you should at least look at P vs NP on wikipedia or something before posting.

Actually on a personal note I am curious if there are any groups of homosexuals of sufficient size that actually advocate for this.

Is this not just the slippery slope fallacy?

This is more based around the whole Marriage Equality thing. For all to be recognized legally as single organizational units if they wish.

Then that bumps into religion and THEY are allowed to define it as they wish, but is that the 'best' approach for a country/collection of identities?

Do you not know enough about it? I can explain it if you want. I just presume Veeky Forums would understand the reference sufficiently.

Politically it's always bad to be known as "anti" anything. It makes you automatically sound confrontational, as if your only reason for existence as a group is to be contrarian. A good example is the abortion debate. It's "pro life" vs "pro choice". Both groups want to make themselves look like they're in SUPPORT of something good, not just trying to oppose something they dislike.

Likewise, "LGBTIQ" gives the impression of wanting to help those groups, whereas "anti-cis" sounds like some sort of lynch squad

What would be a good synonym? Minima?

Regardless, LGBTIQ stands for equality
If they want to be inclusive why wouldn't they just preach equality.
Creating sub-sets is the very thing they seek to avoid, and yet they are happy the fester in their own cum.

If you increase equality, then technically you have to assume 'all' or be against 'all'.

Basically how do we get people to stop taking math personally?

By personalizing it?
You can be in group A
She can be in group B
They can be subsets. The problem with LGBT dilemma is that the sub group for them is straight ppl, and everyone else is "anti-gay". People have an issue of projecting their emotions in situations that don't matter 1 bit to them.
People don't have a problem with who is taking what up the ass I believe that the issue is that gays tend to base their entire identity around being gay and a "sexually perverse" lifestyle. I shouldn't say "tend to" but I think we can all agree that the modern identity of homosexuals is negative and it's not like their burlesque adult show pride parades, which in theory I don't oppose but throwing dildos around in the public in a world were ur not allowed to have sex until ur 18. Straight ppl have nothing on the other hand, gotta vent that sexual frustration someway, I mean look at Japan no body is allowed to talk in public and they have rapes on subways. Humans are social creatures and caveman still, so let's talk it out

So this is society trying to learn the 'off-by-one' error concept? Sounds about right.

What would be a good mathematical coping mechanism to teach them to understand that?

Ultimately it seems like the problem is just when/what/where advertising.

I think it it also called 'multiple of two' error. Interesting.

Ah, it is societal groups thinking that 'unadvertised' danger is 'coming to get them'.

Is there a suitable mathematical parallel anyone can draw on here?

Lesbians, gays, and bisexuals have nothing to do with gender. They're "cis". Same thing with "questioning" and "intersex."

I get your point though, we should come up with something that encompasses all of this rather than autistically adding new letters.

So we wish to separate 'cis' from sexuality. Correct?

I'm just identifying variables here.

>they simply want: ABG (Anti-Binary-Gender)?
But all they want is MIF (Mentally ill faggot)?

Correct. I guess we just had to ID what you're gay for? Or somehow communicate to people that we're all a little bit of a trap, and we like some kinds of traps.

TrapZRGay

I'll take on that but I'd like to add a "MI&F", not to exclude the faggots from the mentally ills, but some mentally ills aren't faggots so it's more proper that way to include everyone.

Oh yes, must always have the precedence of plus defined.