USA Binary Options - The Best Brokers 2020 and All About

Guide to Trading Binary Options in USA

Guide to Trading Binary Options in USA


Merchants have made binary options signals as straightforward as conceivable so as to accelerate the procedure from your underlying store to beginning. There are just a couple of steps that are included including picking the money related resource you need to exchange, select the sum you need to exchange and the heading in which you figure the cost will go. At that point select the expiry time and kick back and sit tight for you alternatives to terminate. A couple of snaps and you are finished. In the event that the result of the exchange is to support you, at that point you ordinarily remain to increase a high benefit.
The capacity for double alternative merchants to exchange limited quantities one after another makes it an incredibly reasonable approach to exchange on the web. At first it's astute to wager limited quantities until you get to holds with it and just exchange as much as you are eager or can stand to possibly lose.
There are numerous money related resources that can be exchanged everywhere throughout the world day by day. This implies regardless of what your favored resource is or where your insight in the money related markets lies you ought to be able to choose it for your alternatives. Profitable binary options strategy intermediaries offer various arrangements of advantages that they enable you to exchange so make sure to check every one cautiously. For more information please visit our site https://vfxalert.com/en/
submitted by vfxalertseo to u/vfxalertseo [link] [comments]

What is the best binary options in USA with the cheapest deposit?

I have seen IQ options getting very popular on my youtube post.
I am starting wonder if there are any options broker that consist forex, binary, crypto.
Also are there any best penny stock broker that you know of? other than robinhood or stash.
submitted by Alexandermacking to Daytrading [link] [comments]

Day Trading Binary Options For USA Traders How To Turn $500 Into $20000 In 1 Month

Day Trading Binary Options For USA Traders How To Turn $500 Into $20000 In 1 Month submitted by emadbably to OptionsInvestopedia [link] [comments]

Trading ✔ Us Us Regulated Binary Options Brokers In Usa

Trading ✔ Us Us Regulated Binary Options Brokers In Usa submitted by emadbably to OptionsInvestopedia [link] [comments]

Best binary options trading brokers located in usa for usa legal traders

Best binary options trading brokers located in usa for usa legal traders submitted by emadbably to OptionsInvestopedia [link] [comments]

United Airlines Becomes First in the USA to Offer Non-Binary Booking Options

United Airlines Becomes First in the USA to Offer Non-Binary Booking Options submitted by Newsboy13 to transgender [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016

options binaries - best binary options brokers in usa - my trading binary options scam aware 2016 submitted by TopVideosCasino to u/TopVideosCasino [link] [comments]

A trans person's measured take on the trans sports issue

So first of all this post was inspired by GGExMachina's brief statement on the issue:
For example, it is objectively the case that biological men have a physical advantage over women. Yet if someone points this out and suggests that transgender people shouldn’t be allowed to fight in women’s UFC, or women’s soccer or weightlifting competitions or whatever, suddenly you’re some kind of evil monster. Rather than saying that of course trans people shouldn’t be bullied and that we could perhaps have a trans olympics (like the Paralympics and Special Olympics), we are expected to lie.
I've found that this position is incredibly popular among liberals/left-leaning people, especially here on reddit. It seems like, once or twice a month, like clockwork, a thread stating more or less the same thing on /unpopularopinion or /offmychest will get thousands of upvotes. And while I completely understand the thought process that leads otherwise left-leaning people to come to such conclusions, I feel like the issue has been, broadly speaking, dishonestly presented to the general public by a mixture of bad-faith actors and people who have succumbed to the moral panic. And, as I've seen, there are plenty of people in this subreddit and elsewhere who are itching to be as supportive as they possibly can to the trans community but find themselves becoming very disillusioned by this particular issue. By making this post I hope to present a more nuanced take on the issue, not only in regards to my personal beliefs on what kinds of policies are best to preserve fairness in women's sports but also in regards to shining a light on how this issue is often times dishonestly presented in an attempt to impede the progression of pro-trans sentiments in the cultural zeitgeist.

Sex & Gender

The word "transgender" is an umbrella term that refers to people whose gender identities differ from those typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. According to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, the approximate composition of "the trans community" in the United States is 29% Transgender men (Female-to-Male), 33% Transgender women (Male-to-Female), and 35% non-binary. (The remaining 3% were survey respondents who self-identified as "crossdressers", who were still included in the survey on the grounds of being gender non-conforming)
While non-binary people, as a group, are probably deserving of their own separate post. the focus of this post will be on trans men and trans women. I will also be primarily focusing on transgender people who pursue medical transition with Hormone-Replacement-Therapy, as they are most relevant to the issue of sports. (Mind that while the majority of binary trans people fit into this camp, there is a sizable minority of trans people who do not feel the need to medically transition.)
What do trans people believe about Gender?
The views of transgender people in regards to Gender are actually pretty varied, although the most prominent positions that I've personally seen are best summed up into two different camps:
  1. The "Trans-Medical" camp
Transgender people who fall into this camp usually consider Gender Dysphoria to be the defining factor of what makes somebody trans. The best way I can describe this camp is that they sort of view being transgender akin to being intersex. Only whereas an intersex person would be born with a disorder that affects the body, a trans person is born with a disorder that affects the brain. Trans people in this camp often times put an emphasis on a clinical course for treatment. For example, a person goes to a psychologist, gets diagnosed with gender dysphoria, starts hormone replacement therapy, pursues surgery, then emerges from this process of either cured of the gender dysphoria or, at the very least, treated to the fullest extent of medical intervention. This position is more or less the original position held by trans activists, back in the day when the word "transsexual" was used instead of "transgender". Though many younger trans people, notably YouTuber Blaire White, also hold this position. Under this position, sex and gender are still quite intertwined, but a trans man can still be considered a man, and a trans woman a woman, under the belief that sex/gender doesn't just refer to chromosomal sex and reproductive organs, but also to neurobiology, genitalia, and secondary sex characteristics. So someone who is transgender, according to this view, is born with the physical characteristics of one sex/gender but the neurobiology of another, and will change their physical characteristics, to the fullest extent medically possible, to match the neurobiology and therefore cure the individual of gender dysphoria.
Critics of this position argue that this mentality is problematic due to being inherently exclusive to transgender people who do not pursue medical transition, whom are often times deemed as "transtrenders" by people within this camp. Many people find it additionally problematic because it is also inherently exclusive to poorer trans people, particularly those in developing nations, who may not have access to trans-related medical care. Note that there are plenty of trans people who *do* have access to medical transition, but nevertheless feel as if the trans community shouldn't gatekeep people who cannot afford or do not desire medical transition, thus believing in the latter camp.
  1. The "Gender Identity" camp
I feel like this camp is the one most popularly criticized by people on the right, but is also probably the most mainstream. It is the viewpoint held by many more left-wing trans people, (Note that in the aforementioned 2015 survey, only 1% of trans respondents voted Republican, so trans people are largely a pretty left-wing group, therefore it makes sense that this position would be the most mainstream) but also notably held by American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, GLAAD, and other mainstream health organizations and activist groups.
While people in this camp still acknowledge that medical transition to treat gender dysphoria can still be a very important aspect of the transgender experience, it's believed that the *defining* experience is simply having a gender identity different from the one they were assigned at birth. "Gender identity" simply being the internal, personal sense of being a man, a woman, or outside the gender binary.
Many people in this camp, though, still often maintain that gender identity is (at least partially) neurobiological, but differ from the first camp in regards to acknowledging that the issue is less black & white than an individual simply having a "male brain" or a "female brain", but rather that the neurological characteristics associated with gender exist on more of a spectrum, thus leaving the door open to gender non-conforming people who do not identify as trans, as well as to non-binary people. This is where the "gender is a spectrum" phrase comes from.
"52 genders" is a popular right-wing meme that makes fun of this viewpoint, however it is important to note that many trans and non-binary people disagree with the idea of quantifying gender identity to such an absurd amount of individual genders, rather more simply maintaining that there are men, women, and a small portion of people in-between, with a few words such as "agender" or "genderqueer" being used to describe specific identities/presentations within this category.
It's also noteworthy that not all people in this camp believe that neurobiology is the be-all-end-all of gender identity, as many believe that the performativity of gender also plays an integral role in one's identity. (That gender identity is a mixture of neurobiology and performativity is a position held by YouTuber Contrapoints)
Trans people and biological sex
So while the aforementioned "Gender Identity" viewpoint has become quite popularized among liberals and leftists, I have noticed a certain rhetorical mentality/assumption become prevalent alongside it, especially among cisgender people who consider themselves trans-allies:
"Sex and Gender are different. A trans woman is a woman who is biologically male. A trans man is a man who is biologically female"
When "Sex" is defined by someone's chromosomes, or the sex organs they were born with, this is correct. However, there is a pretty good reason why the trans community tends to prefer terms like "Assigned Male at Birth" rather than "Biologically Male". This is done not only for the inclusion of people who are both intersex and transgender (For example, someone can be born intersex but assigned male based on the existence of a penis or micropenis), but also due to the aforementioned viewpoint on divergent neurobiology being the cause for gender dysphoria. Those reasons are why the word "Assigned" is used. But the reason why it's "Assigned Male/Female At Birth" instead of just "Assigned Male/Female" is because among the trans community there exists an understanding of the mutability of sexually dimorphic biology that the general population is often ignorant to. For example, often times people (especially older folks) don't even know of the existence of Hormone Replacement Therapy, and simply assume that trans people get a single "sex change operation" that, (for a trans woman) would just entail the removal of the penis and getting breast implants. Therefore they imagine the process to be "medically sculpting a male to look female" instead of a more natural biological process of switching the endocrine system form male to female or vice versa and letting the body change over the course of multiple years. It doesn't help that, for a lot of older trans people (namely Caitlyn Jenner, who is probably the most high profile trans person sadly), the body can be a lot more resistant to change even with hormones so they *do* need to rely on plastic surgery a lot more to get obvious results)
So what sexually dimorphic bodily characteristics can one expect to change from Hormone Replacement Therapy?
(Note that there is a surprising lack of studies done on some of the more intricate changes that HRT can, so I've put a "*" next to the changes that are anecdotal, but still commonly and universally observed enough among trans people [including myself for the MTF stuff] to consider factual. I've also put a "✝" next to the changes that only occur when people transition before or during puberty)
Male to Female:
Female to Male:
For the sake of visual representation, here are a couple of images from /transtimelines to demonstrate these changes in adult transitioners (I've specifically chosen athletic individuals to best demonstrate muscular changes)
https://preview.redd.it/ntw333p9sbty.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=5fe779757dfc4a5dc56566ff648d337c59fbe5cb
https://www.reddit.com/transtimelines/comments/dpca0f/3_years_on_vitamin_t/
Additionally, here's a picture of celebrity Kim Petras who transitioned before male puberty, in case you were wondering what "female pubescent skeletal development" looks like in a trans woman:
https://cdn2.thelineofbestfit.com/images/made/images/remote/https_cdn2.thelineofbestfit.com/portraits/kim_petras_burakcingi01_1107_1661_90.jpg

How does this relate to sports?

Often times, when the whole "transgender people in sports" discussion arises, a logical error is made when *all* transgender people are assumed to be "biologically" their birth sex. For example, when talking about trans women participating in female sports, these instances will be referred to as cases of "Biological males competing against females".
As mentioned before, calling a trans woman "biologically male" strictly in regards to chromosomes or sex organs at birth would be correct. However, not only can it be considered derogatory (the word "male" is colloquially a shorthand for "man", after all), but there are many instances where calling a post-HRT transgender person "biologically [sex assigned at birth]" is downright misleading.
For example, hospitals have, given transgender patients improper or erroneous medical care by assuming treatment based on birth sex where treatment based on their current endocrinological sex would have been more adequate.
Acute Clinical Care of Transgender Patients: A Review
Conclusions and relevance: Clinicians should learn how to engage with transgender patients, appreciate that unique anatomy or the use of gender-affirming hormones may affect the prevalence of certain disease (eg, cardiovascular disease, venous thromboembolism, and osteoporosis), and be prepared to manage specific issues, including those related to hormone therapy. Health care facilities should work toward providing inclusive systems of care that correctly identify and integrate information about transgender patients into the electronic health record, account for the unique needs of these patients within the facility, and through education and policy create a welcoming environment for their care.
Some hosptials have taken to labeling the biological sex of transgender patients as "MTF" (for post-HRT trans women) and "FTM" (for post-HRT trans men), which is a much more medically useful identifier compared to their sex assigned at birth.
In regards to the sports discussion, I've seen *multiple threads* where redditors have backed up their opinions on the subject of trans people in sports with studies demonstrating that cis men are, on average, more athletically capable than cis women. Which I personally find to be a pathetic misunderstanding of the entire issue.
Because we're not supposed to be comparing the athletic capabilities of natal males to natal females, here. We're supposed to comparing the athletic capabilities of *post-HRT male-to-females* to natal females. And, if we're going to really have a fact-based discussion on the matter, we need to have separate categories for pre-pubescent and post-pubescent transitioners. Since, as mentioned earlier, the former will likely have different skeletal characteristics compared to the latter.
The current International Olympic Committee (IOC) model for trans participation, and criticisms of said model
(I quoted the specific guidelines from the International Cycling Union, but similar guidelines exist for all Olympic sports)
Elite Competition
At elite competition levels, members may have the opportunity to represent the United States and participate in international competition. They may therefore be subject to the policies and regulations of the International Cycling Union (UCI) and International Olympic Committee (IOC). USA Cycling therefore follows the IOC guidelines on transgender athletes at these elite competition levels. For purposes of this policy, international competition means competition sanctioned by the UCI or competition taking place outside the United States in which USA Cycling’s competition rules do not apply.
The IOC revised its guidelines on transgender athlete participation in 2015, to focus on hormone levels and medical monitoring. The main points of the guidelines are:
Those who transition from female to male are eligible to compete in the male category without restriction. It is the responsibility of athletes to be aware of current WADA/USADA policies and file for appropriate therapeutic use exemptions.
Those who transition from male to female are eligible to compete in the female category under the following conditions:
The athlete has declared that her gender identity is female. The declaration cannot be changed, for sporting purposes, for a minimum of four years.
The athlete must demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition (with the requirement for any longer period to be based on a confidential case-by-case evaluation, considering whether or not 12 months is a sufficient length of time to minimize any advantage in women’s competition).
The athlete's total testosterone level in serum must remain below 10 nmol/L throughout the period of desired eligibility to compete in the female category.
Compliance with these conditions may be monitored by random or for-cause testing. In the event of non-compliance, the athlete’s eligibility for female competition will be suspended for 12 months.
Valid criticisms of the IOC model are usually based on the fact that, even though hormone replacement therapy provokes changes to muscle mass, it does *not* shrink the size of someone's skeleton or cardiovascular system. Therefore an adult-transitioned trans woman could, even after losing all levels of male-typical muscle mass, still have an advantage in certain sports if she had an excessively large skeletal frame, and was participating in a sport where such a thing would be advantageous.
Additionally, the guidelines only require that athletes be able to demonstrate having had female hormone levels for 12-24 months, which isn't necessarily long enough to completely lose musculature gained from training on testosterone (anecdotally it can take 2-4 years to completely lose male-typical muscle mass) So the IOC guidelines don't have any safeguard against, for example, a trans woman training with testosterone as the dominant hormone in her body, and then taking hormones for the bare minimum time period and still having some of the advantage left.
Note that, while lower level sports have had (to the glee of right-wing publications sensationalizing the issue) instances of this exact thing happening, in the 16 years since these IOC guidelines were established, not a single transgender individual has won an Olympic medal
Also note that none of the above criticisms of the IOC policy would apply in regards to the participation of pre-pubescent-transitioned trans women. After all, male-pubescent bone structure and cardiovascular size, and male-typical muscle levels, can't possibly exist if you never went through male puberty to begin with.
What could better guidelines entail, to best preserve fairness in female sports while avoiding succumbing to anti-trans moral panic?
In my personal opinion, sports leagues should pick one of the three above options depending on what best fits the nature of the sport and the eliteness of the competition. For example, extremely competitive contact sports might be better off going with the first option, but an aerobic sport such as marathon running would probably be fine with the third option.

How this issue has been misrepresented by The Right

I'll use Joe Rogan as an example of this last thing:
She calls herself a woman but... I tend to disagree. And, uh, she, um... she used to be a man but now she has had, she's a transgender which is (the) official term that means you've gone through it, right? And she wants to be able to fight women in MMA. I say no f***ing way.
I say if you had a dick at one point in time, you also have all the bone structure that comes with having a dick. You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints. You're a f***ing man. That's a man, OK? You can't have... that's... I don't care if you don't have a dick any more...
If you want to be a woman in the bedroom and you know you want to play house and all of that other s*** and you feel like you have, your body is really a woman's body trapped inside a man's frame and so you got a operation, that's all good in the hood. But you can't fight chicks. Get the f*** out of here. You're out of your mind. You need to fight men, you know? Period. You need to fight men your size because you're a man. You're a man without a dick.
I'm not trying to discriminate against women in any way, shape, or form and I'm a big supporter of women's fighting. I loved watching that Ronda Rousey/Liz Carmouche fight. But those are actual women. Those are actual women. And as strong as Ronda Rousey looks, she's still looks to me like a pretty girl. She's a beautiful girl who happens to be strong. She's a girl! [Fallon Fox] is not a girl, OK? This is a [transgender] woman. It's a totally different specification.
Calling a trans woman a "man", and equating transitioning to merely removal of the dick, and equating trans women's experiences as women as "playing house" and "being a woman in the bedroom". These things are obviously pretty transphobic, and if Rogan had said these things about just any random trans woman his statements would have likely been more widely seen in that light. But when it's someone having an unfair advantage in sports, and the audience is supposed to be angry with you, it's much more socially acceptable thing to say such things. But the problem is, when you say these kinds of things about one trans woman, you're essentially saying those derogatory things about all trans women by extension. It's the equivalent of using an article about a black home invader who murdered a family as an excuse to use a racial slur.
Now, I'm not saying that Rogan necessarily did this on purpose, in fact I'm more inclined to believe that it was done moreso due to ignorance rather than having an actual ideological agenda. But since then, many right wing ideologues who do have an ideological agenda have used this issue as an excuse to voice their opinions on trans people while appearing to be less bigoted. Ie. "I'm not trying to be a bigot or anything and I accept people's rights to live their lives as they see fit, but we NEED to keep men out of women's sports", as a sly way to call trans women "men".
Additionally, doing this allows them to slip in untrue statements about the biology of trans women. I mean, first of all in regards to the statement "You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints", obviously even in regards to post-pubescent transitioners, not every trans woman is going to have bigger hands and shoulder joints than every cis woman (My hands are actually smaller than my aunt's!). It's just that people who go through male puberty on average tend to have bigger hands and shoulder joints compared to people who go through female puberty. But over-exaggerating the breadth of sexual dimorphism, as if males and females are entirely different species to each-other, helps to paint the idea of transitioning in a more nonsensical light.
I hope this thread has presented this issue in a better light for anyone reading it. Let me know if you have any thoughts/criticisms of my stances or the ways I went about this issue.
submitted by Rosa_Rojacr to samharris [link] [comments]

MAME 0.222

MAME 0.222

MAME 0.222, the product of our May/June development cycle, is ready today, and it’s a very exciting release. There are lots of bug fixes, including some long-standing issues with classics like Bosconian and Gaplus, and missing pan/zoom effects in games on Seta hardware. Two more Nintendo LCD games are supported: the Panorama Screen version of Popeye, and the two-player Donkey Kong 3 Micro Vs. System. New versions of supported games include a review copy of DonPachi that allows the game to be paused for photography, and a version of the adult Qix game Gals Panic for the Taiwanese market.
Other advancements on the arcade side include audio circuitry emulation for 280-ZZZAP, and protection microcontroller emulation for Kick and Run and Captain Silver.
The GRiD Compass series were possibly the first rugged computers in the clamshell form factor, possibly best known for their use on NASA space shuttle missions in the 1980s. The initial model, the Compass 1101, is now usable in MAME. There are lots of improvements to the Tandy Color Computer drivers in this release, with better cartridge support being a theme. Acorn BBC series drivers now support Solidisk file system ROMs. Writing to IMD floppy images (popular for CP/M computers) is now supported, and a critical bug affecting writes to HFE disk images has been fixed. Software list additions include a collection of CDs for the SGI MIPS workstations.
There are several updates to Apple II emulation this month, including support for several accelerators, a new IWM floppy controller core, and support for using two memory cards simultaneously on the CFFA2. As usual, we’ve added the latest original software dumps and clean cracks to the software lists, including lots of educational titles.
Finally, the memory system has been optimised, yielding performance improvements in all emulated systems, you no longer need to avoid non-ASCII characters in paths when using the chdman tool, and jedutil supports more devices.
There were too many HyperScan RFID cards added to the software list to itemise them all here. You can read about all the updates in the whatsnew.txt file, or get the source and 64-bit Windows binary packages from the download page.

MAME Testers Bugs Fixed

New working machines

New working clones

Machines promoted to working

Clones promoted to working

New machines marked as NOT_WORKING

New clones marked as NOT_WORKING

New working software list additions

Software list items promoted to working

New NOT_WORKING software list additions

submitted by cuavas to emulation [link] [comments]

Subreddit Survey Results

Greetings, exchristian!
The subreddit survey closed on 10 June. Since then, I have been combing through the results, and pulling everything together to publish here. 805 of you responded, which is a small proportion of our 66k members, but probably a good portion of the subscribers who are actually active on the subreddit, and not bad for a first try. I appreciate every one of you who took the time to fill out the survey, who contributed questions, and who provided feedback in the comments of the original post. All advice has been taken on board, and if I do this again in the future, I will change the survey accordingly. But you're here for the stats, so let's get into them!

Part 1: Demographics

Q1: What age group are you in?

Age Number of Responses Percentage
10 or under 0 0%
11-15 40 5%
16-19 136 16.9%
20-24 206 25.7%
25-29 182 22.7%
30-34 121 15.1%
35-39 56 7%
40-44 21 2.6%
45-50 13 1.6%
50+ 28 3.5%
exchristian mostly aligns with Reddit's user base in the age question, with most respondents in the 16-35 range. There are some under 16, which may just be normal for Reddit, but could also be people seeking support with living as a non-Christian in a Christian home in an already difficult part of their lives. Overall, though, this question throws up no surprises.

Q2: What Denomination(s) were you part of?

Denomination Number of Responses Percentage
Non-Denominational 250 31.2%
Baptist 231 28.8%
Catholic 119 14.9%
Other Evangelical 98 12.2%
Pentecostal 97 12.1%
Calvinist/Presbyterian/ Reformed 82 10.2%
Lutheran 47 5.9%
Methodist 39 4.9%
Anglican/Episcopalian 34 4.2%
Church of Christ 31 3.9%
Orthodox 20 2.5%
Seventh-Day Adventist 14 1.9%
Mormon 10 1.2%
Anabaptist (Amish/Mennonite) 8 1%
Plymouth Brethren 7 0.8%
Jehovah's Witnesses 2 0.2%
Other 61 6.1%
A lot of denominations came up here, and I mean a lot. The largest groups are Baptist and non-denominational, which probably reflects the US-centric nature of the subreddit, which we will see in the next question. The sub also leans ex-Protestant, with only 14.9% ex-Catholics and 2.5% ex-Orthodox. The quantity and variety of the self-filled answers made it easier to just group them under 'Other'. A substantial portion of those answers came from offshoots of Methodism, notably the Nazarene (6 responses) and Wesleyan (4) groups. Others included IFB (4), and Assemblies of God (4 - one of a number of Pentecostal-ish groups represented in those answers).
A few peripheral thoughts on this question: I was surprised by the lack of JWs in the sub, but they probably gravitate towards exJW rather than the umbrella sub here, with the same theme applying to the slightly larger Mormon group. I am also intrigued by our Amish/Mennonite contingent. If any of you would be willing to share your experiences with those groups, I'd be very interested to hear.

Q3: Where do you live?

Location Number of Responses Percentage
United States South 220 27.5%
United States Midwest 169 21.1%
United States West 132 16.4%
United States Northeast 93 11.6%
Canada 56 7%
United Kingdom 28 3.5%
Australia 20 2.5%
New Zealand 6 0.7%
Singapore 6 0.7%
The Netherlands 6 0.7%
Germany 5 0.6%
South Africa 5 0.6%
Brazil 3 0.4%
Ireland 3 0.4%
Malaysia 3 0.4%
Romania 3 0.4%
The Philippines 3 0.4%
Czech Republic/Czechia 2 0.3%
Dominican Republic 2 0.3%
France 2 0.3%
Italy 2 0.3%
Mexico 2 0.3%
Norway 2 0.3%
Poland 2 0.3%
In addition to these, there was 1 answer each for: Alaska, 'American living abroad', Austria, China, Denmark, Dominica, Ecuador, Finland, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Hong Kong, India, 'Jamaica/UAE', Japan, Latvia, Nagaland, Namibia, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Portugal, The Caribbean, The Nordics, 'USA and Philippines', and Zambia.
The overall picture here is that this sub is overwhelmingly American. 77% of you live in some part of the United States, with another 7% from Canada adding to the North American group. Unsurprisingly, most are from English-speaking countries, although there are more from continental Europe than I expected. By location, we are spread far and wide, but it will surprise nobody who has spent any time on this subreddit that a vast majority of users are American.

Q4: What is your ethnicity?

Ethnicity Number of Responses Percentage
White/Caucasian 643 80.3%
Asian 55 6.9%
Black/African-American 40 5%
Latino/Hispanic 33 4.1%
Mixed Race 20 2.5%
Indigenous North American 5 0.6%
Pacific Islander 2 0.3%
Indigenous Australian 1 0.1%
North African 1 0.1%
I received some criticism for this question, which was fair. It was poorly thought out and poorly worded. If nothing else, I should have made Mixed Race an option to be picked and not left that to the 'Other' field - a very embarrassing oversight. But the results do tell us something. The main thing they tell us is that our subreddit is overwhelmingly white, which also correlates with earlier answers which show American ex-Evangelicals as by far the largest group. I don't know exactly why ethnic minorities are so poorly represented here - my best guess is that it is a reflection of Reddit demographics generally. If others have insights on this, I'd be interested to hear them.

Q5: What gender do you identify as?

Gender Number of Responses Percentage
Male 404 50.3%
Female 341 42.5%
Non-Binary 41 5.1%
Prefer not to say 12 1.5%
Genderfluid 2 0.2%
Agender 1 0.1%
Transmale 1 0.1%
These were interesting answers. A quick google search tells me that Reddit overall is over 70% male. But in exchristian, while a small majority of users are men, over 40% are women. As a man, I may be pontificating about something I don't understand, but I wonder if this is connected to the sexism inherent in much of Christianity and Christian teaching. Women may be more likely to leave Christianity than men, because they are more likely to feel unwelcome in a sexist environment. The 5%+ operating outside of the traditional genders may be feeling a similar thing. Trans, Non-Binary, and Genderfluid people probably struggle to find a place in Christianity and Christian doctrine unless they suppress their authentic self. Again, I may be talking out of my arse here, and those with actual experience of this can hopefully provide more insights in the comments.

Q6: What best describes your sexual orientation?

Sexuality Number of Responses Percentage
Heterosexual 469 58.7%
Bisexual 185 23.1%
Homosexual 67 8.4%
Asexual 44 5.5%
Pansexual 15 1.9%
Demisexual 3 0.4%
Queer 3 0.4%
Other 13 1.6%
Of the 'Other' group, most expressed some measure of confusion, with 2 particularly mentioning purity culture as a factor in that. Single answers included Gynesexual, Panromantic, and Sapphic Asexual.
I think we are seeing a similar phenomenon here as with the last question. The larger than average LGBTQ+ representation might be a demographic feature, but it could also be because a lot of Christian doctrine is extremely homophobic, and LGBTQ+ people probably feel unwelcome in Christianity, and have more reason than heterosexuals to doubt aspects of Christian teaching. Again, though, I would welcome further insights from LGBTQ+ people on this issue.

Q7: Which of these options best describes your political opinions?

Political Position Number of Responses Percentage
Left/Liberal 544 68.4%
Centrist/Moderate 225 28.3%
Right/Conservative 26 3.3%
The framing of that question was slightly over-simplified, but it's not a surprise to see that very few people here see themselves as right-wing or conservative politically, both given Reddit's demographics, and given the closeness of large sections of Christianity (especially in the US) with right-wing and socially conservative politics.

Part 2: Education

Q8: What is your current level of education?

Education Level Number of Responses Percentage
College/University Graduate 395 49.2%
Currently at College/University 180 22.4%
Currently in School 110 13.7%
High School Graduate 94 11.7%
PhD/Professorship 20 2.5%
No Formal Qualifications 4 0.5%
A majority of us are either in College/University, or are Graduates. That, again, may just reflect Reddit's demographics, but it is no coincidence that the more someone learns, the less likely they are to remain religious. I have certainly found that in my own experience.

Q9: What type of school were you educated in?

School Number of Responses Percentage
Public/State School 605 75.3%
Religious School 286 35.6%
I was Home-Schooled 122 15.2%
Secular Private School 61 7.6%


Q10: If you went to a religious school, do you believe it contributed towards your deconversion?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 197 38.2%
No 190 38.6%
Not Sure 129 25%

Q11: If you went to a secular school, do you believe it contributed towards your deconversion?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 247 37%
No 290 43.5%
Not Sure 130 19.5%
The answers to Q10 could be unreliable, as more people answered it than answered 'Religious School' to Q9. But it does show that a reasonable percentage of both people who went to religious schools and to secular schools felt that that contributed towards their deconversions. Those will probably be for different reasons, and I think school experiences would be an interesting thing to dig further in to, either in the comments here or in a separate post.

Part 3: Beliefs and Deconversion Experience

Q12: At what age did you stop being a christian?

Age Number of Responses Percentage
10 or under 15 1.9%
11-15 139 17.3%
16-19 211 26.3%
20-24 224 27.9%
25-29 122 15.2%
30-34 54 6.7%
35-39 15 1.9%
40-44 6 0.7%
45-49 10 1.2%
50+ 6 0.7%
Most of us lost our belief between the ages of 16 and 25, and I don't think that's a coincidence. It's the time when you're beginning to strike out on your own in the world, forge your own path, and cast off your parents' preconceptions. It's also the time when you start to think more critically about things, and for many of us thinking critically about Christianity was what drove us to leave it.

Q13: How would you describe your current belief system?

Belief Number of Responses Percentage
Atheist 317 39.7%
Agnostic 238 29.9%
Anti-theist 47 5.9%
Humanist 45 5.6%
Apatheist 26 3.3%
Pagan/Wiccan 17 2.1%
Deist 15 1.9%
Pantheist 13 1.6%
Buddhist 11 1.4%
Unsure 10 1.2%
Agnostic Atheist 6 0.7%
Ignostic 5 0.6%
Satanist 5 0.6%
Spiritual 5 0.6%
Misotheist 3 0.4%
Universalist 2 0.3%
Other 32 4%
Most of the 'Other' answers represented mixed philosophies - a few people have pointed out to me that I should have made this question multiple choice. Single answers included Hindu, Ietsist, Irreligious, Jewish, Left Hand Path, Longhouse Religion, Muslim, Nihilist, Occultist, Panendeist, and Panentheist.
It won't surprise any of us to see that this subreddit is mostly Atheist/Agnostic. However, there are some more spiritually-minded people here, and although they are not a large group they are a noticeable segment.

Q14: If you do not consider yourself an Atheist/Agnostic/etc, how free do you feel to discuss your spiritual views in exchristian?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
1 (Not at all Free) 5 1.4%
2 23 6.4%
3 87 24.2%
4 69 19.2%
5 (Completely Free) 176 48.9%
This seems to have faced a similar problem to Q10, in that many people answered it who should not have. They represent all but one of the '1' answers, and fairly even portions of the others. The answers of spiritually-minded people seem to come out at around the same proportionally as the overall responses. Reassuringly, that means that most do feel free to share their views here, although it also means that there is a minority who do not. While I cannot speak for that minority, one of the answers to the previous question provided a small paragraph on it (side note: try not to do this in surveys, folks. Short and to the point is best). That person said "I don't like to talk about this openly on the sub because I feel like people will see me as spacey and illogical, but that might be because I watch too many hardcore Youtube skeptics".
I think that answer makes sense as a reason some people don't feel entirely free to share their views here. This sub clearly has an atheist majority, and the stereotype of atheists is that we are hostile to any and all spiritual beliefs. It's not a problem with the subreddit, which I've always found to be extremely friendly and open, but one of perception and self-consciousness. But as always, if you feel like I'm grasping at the wrong end of the stick here, feel free to say so - in PMs if you don't want to do it publicly.
Following on from all of that, I'd genuinely be interested to hear more about the beliefs of our more spiritual members - the more niche the better. I'm not that way inclined myself, but the previous question has sparked an academic curiosity.

Q15: Are you 'out of the closet' as an ex-christian?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes, to everyone I know 79 9.9%
Yes, to most people I know 203 25.3%
Yes, to some people I know 387 48.3%
No 133 16.6%
Very few of us have told everyone in our lives that we're no longer christian, but most of us have told at least some people. I imagine that that mostly manifests as people keeping it a secret from family or church friends, or a christian workplace, but being open about it among non-church friends or in a secular workplace.

Q16: If you are 'out of the closet', do your christian family and/or friends accept your decision?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 113 18.9%
No 152 25.4%
Some 333 55.7%
Less than 20% of people's christian circles fully accept them leaving christianity. Christians hate apostates, what a surprise! That a majority have had at least some acceptance is good to see, though, and I am glad for those of you who have experienced that.

Q17: If you are not 'out of the closet', do you plan to come out in the near future?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 86 16.3%
No 163 30.9%
Not Sure 279 52.8%
Most closet-dwellers are unsure if they'll come out or not, with a fairly large minority having decided to keep it a secret, at least for now. A majority for the undecideds is not a surprise. It's a very difficult decision, and you have to weigh up your freedom with the damage you might do to your personal relationships. Not an easy choice.

Q18: Are there any non-christians or ex-christians in your immediate or extended family?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 425 53.3%
No 373 46.7%

Q19: Outside of your family, do you know any ex-christians in your real life?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 505 63.1%
No 295 36.9%

Q20: Do you live in a place where you feel socially at risk if you admit you are no longer a christian?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 158 19.8%
No 258 32.3%
Sometimes (i.e. among family but not among colleagues) 384 48%

Q21: If you do feel socially at risk, how important has exchristian been in giving you a safe space to speak freely?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
1 (Not at all important) 22 3.7%
2 34 5.7%
3 137 23%
4 202 33.9%
5 (Very Important) 200 33.6%
This group of questions shows quite a stark difference. While a majority of us do have other non-christians or ex-christians in our lives, a substantial minority seem to be surrounded by christians, most of them probably in the American south where, from what I read on this subreddit, Christianity is everywhere. That makes exchristian very important as a support subreddit, which I've seen others say here and have felt myself. This community is a very important resource for many people.

Q22: When you were a christian, did you participate in church community activities (i.e. youth groups)?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 716 89.3%
No 86 10.7%

Q23: Do you miss christianity's sense of community?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 257 32.1%
No 420 52.4%
Not Sure 124 15.5%

Q24: Do you feel isolated since deconverting?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Frequently 109 13.7%
Sometimes 287 36.1%
I have in the past 200 25.1%
Never 200 25.1%

Q25: If you have felt isolated, has exchristian helped to reduce that isolation?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 450 70.1%
No 51 7.9%
Not Sure 141 22%

Q26: Outside of exchristian, have you found anything in a secular space to replace the church community?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 353 45.1%
No 429 54.9%

Q27: On the whole, how important has the exchristian community been in helping you through your deconversion?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
1 (Not at all Important) 104 13.8%
2 96 12.8%
3 189 25.2%
4 189 25.2%
5 (Very Important) 173 23%
This is another group of questions which really show how important this community is. Most of us were quite involved in our churches, and although most say they do not miss christianity, a majority have felt isolated at some point, and a large majority of those say exchristian was important to reducing that isolation. The answers to question 27 reflect that again. I think it's really important that this sub exists to help alleviate some of these problems.

Q28: Do you experience rapture and/or tribulation anxiety?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Frequently 59 7.4%
Sometimes 147 18.4%
I have in the past 270 33.8%
Never 322 40.4%
A majority of us have, at some point, experienced rapture or tribulation anxiety. That's hardly surprising, given how strong the 'left behind' motif is in christian preaching and culture. More encouragingly, a majority of those who have experienced this say that they do not experience it now. As someone who has suffered from this in the past, I can reassure you that it does get better. The more distance you put between yourself and your christian past, the easier it becomes to move past that anxiety.

Q29: Have you been diagnosed with a mental illness or illnesses?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 348 43.6%
No 451 56.4%

Q30: Do you believe that christianity has had a negative impact on your mental health?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Yes 667 83.3%
No 58 7.2%
Not Sure 76 9.5%
While a majority of us have not received an official mental health diagnosis, a substantial minority have, a testament to how much of a toll christianity and the process of tearing yourself away from it takes on your mental health. An overwhelming majority also think that it has had a negative impact on their mental health, which will surprise nobody who has spent any time reading the posts on this sub.

Q31: On the whole, has your loss of belief made your life easier or more difficult, or has it had no impact?

Answer Number of Responses Percentage
Easier 481 60%
More Difficult 105 13.1%
No Impact 54 6.7%
Not Sure 161 20.1%
I have realised since writing the survey that this question was too simplistic and doesn't reflect the variety of people's experiences. Nevertheless, a clear majority do consider their deconversion to have made their life easier, and in the light of the mental health questions that is hardly surprising.

Conclusion/TL;DR
So, what has this survey told us? In demographics, a clear majority in this subreddit are white American protestants, with most between the ages of 16 and 35. In both gender and sexuality, it is more diverse than reddit overall, and most are well-educated. A clear majority are either atheist or agnostic, but there is a diverse (if small) group holding alternative beliefs. With most of us only halfway 'out' as ex-christians and with a clear majority identifying christianity as causing mental health troubles, the survey also shows the importance of exchristian as a place on the internet where people in our situation can come together and share experiences. I'm grateful to all of you for being here and for making this sub the place that it is.
And that's a wrap. Well done for making it this far, I guess, and thanks to all of you who responded to the survey. Pulling the data together for this post has been intense, but fun in its own way, and I have enjoyed finding out a bit more about who we are as a community. As I've said throughout, comments, questions, and criticism are all welcome if you have any to share, and I'm very interested to see what the community thinks of the data.
submitted by acuriousoddity to exchristian [link] [comments]

MAME 0.221

MAME 0.221

Our fourth release of the year, MAME 0.221, is now ready. There are lots of interesting changes this time. We’ll start with some of the additions. There’s another load of TV games from JAKKS Pacific, Senario, Tech2Go and others. We’ve added another Panorama Screen Game & Watch title: this one features the lovable comic strip canine Snoopy. On the arcade side, we’ve got Great Bishi Bashi Champ and Anime Champ (both from Konami), Goori Goori (Unico), the prototype Galun.Pa! (Capcom CPS), a censored German version of Gun.Smoke, a Japanese location test version of DoDonPachi Dai-Ou-Jou, and more bootlegs of Cadillacs and Dinosaurs, Final Fight, Galaxian, Pang! 3 and Warriors of Fate.
In computer emulation, we’re proud to present another working UNIX workstation: the MIPS R3000 version of Sony’s NEWS family. NEWS was never widespread outside Japan, so it’s very exciting to see this running. F.Ulivi has added support for the Swedish/Finnish and German versions of the HP 86B, and added two service ROMs to the software list. ICEknight contributed a cassette software list for the Timex NTSC variants of the Sinclair home computers. There are some nice emulation improvements for the Luxor ABC family of computers, with the ABC 802 now considered working.
Other additions include discrete audio emulation for Midway’s Gun Fight, voice output for Filetto, support for configurable Toshiba Pasopia PAC2 slot devices, more vgmplay features, and lots more Capcom CPS mappers implemented according to equations from dumped PALs. This release also cleans up and simplifies ROM loading. For the most part things should work as well as or better than they did before, but MAME will no longer find loose CHD files in top-level media directories. This is intentional – it’s unwieldy with the number of supported systems.
As usual, you can get the source and 64-bit Windows binary packages from the download page. This will be the last month where we use this format for the release notes – with the increase in monthly development activity, it’s becoming impractical to keep up.

MAME Testers Bugs Fixed

New working machines

New working clones

Machines promoted to working

Clones promoted to working

New machines marked as NOT_WORKING

New clones marked as NOT_WORKING

New working software list additions

Software list items promoted to working

New NOT_WORKING software list additions

Source Changes

submitted by cuavas to emulation [link] [comments]

BINARY OPTIONS TRADING USA - HERE'S THE INFO YOU NEED Binary Options Strategy 2020  100% WIN GUARANTEED - Deposit $10 Whitdraw $1,530.79 -Trading in Real BINARY OPTIONS TRADING IN USA Best Binary Options brokers in USA - My Trading Binary Options Scam Aware 2016 US Binary Options Brokers: Available Brokers for US Binary Traders

Binary Options USA: What To Consider. Please note that most US brokers are unregulated. Therefore please do your own research before signing up and before becoming a binary options customer there. All unregulated brokers are “ok” at best. There is a higher risk of getting scammed by an unregulated broker. Binary options traded outside the U.S. are typically structured differently than binaries available on U.S. exchanges. When considering speculating or hedging, binary options are an alternative Binary.com USA REGULATION NOTICE: Please note if you are from the USA: some binary options companies are not regulated within the United States. These companies are not supervised, connected or affiliated with any of the regulatory agencies such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), National Futures Association (NFA), Securities and Exchange Binoption - Learn Binary Options Trading - Trade Binary Options Online - Be Successful Trader Why Binoption is a recommended binary options trading site for all binary traders? It is heartwarming to mention that we always encourage our binary options traders to succeed in trading by spending more time to learn and acquire adequate knowledge.

[index] [300] [9678] [29835] [449] [10637] [19539] [28081] [27493] [31082] [29058]

BINARY OPTIONS TRADING USA - HERE'S THE INFO YOU NEED

Suddenly, a whole list of brokers using Spotoption, the main platform provider for 90% of the brokers out there - stopped accepting US clients. Watch the video and click the link for more details ... See more details, helpful information, cool tips and suggestions about binary options strategies. I tested over the years. In this video you'l see binary options brokers & trading strategy. Best binary options trading brokers located in usa for usa legal traders - Duration: 5:09. Binary Options Trading Ninja 10,089 views. 5:09. Binary Options Strategy 2020 100% WIN GUARANTEED - Deposit $10 Whitdraw $1,530.79 -Trading in Real ... United States Restricted Mode: Off History Help About ... binary options trading usa If you search the web looking for how to make money with binary options, a website call How We Trade number one recommendation is to use a signaling service.

Flag Counter