Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jipehog]

I'd say that "I define my gender as a <helicopter/whatever>" is often bad-faith absurdism, by those that don't believe that "◇gender≠sex" and decide to go the "by supporting gay marriage, you'll have people marrying animals/buildings next" contrary argumentation.

While I suspect that original news was precisely about that. Using absurdism is useful in many contexts (as for bad-faith I see much more on the opposite side with those with persistent problem with inability to have a conversation without attacking others)

In the case of what was discussed here, lets not mince words the underlying issue here is about rights. Unless you can came up with definition of gender that is testable, falsifiable and verifiable that can be used with existing law you going to have issues.

[TD1]

It's been a thing in the US too to some extent, but with a uniquely American character:
Some US schools *do* have kitty litter.
For sheltering in place during... incidents.

And yet trolls and credulous bigots happily spun a culture-war narrative about it.  Along with people demanding that we take their "concerns" seriously and be respectful.
Like no
The people spinning lies to incite hatred should be stopped.  With state violence if necessary, AKA fines and whatever.

And the people who believe this shit are a combination of stupid and eager to believe hateful messaging.  They don't deserve respect for that, they need deprogramming.  The extent to which they actually *believe* what they're saying is debatable- they see a narrative that affirms their bigotry, they share it.  Fuck'm.  Kindness WILL NOT change their mind.

Obviously, if they *do* change their mind- perhaps because they're tired of being mocked for their gullibility and hatred- I fully believe in restorative justice, which in this case is just "Don't sweat it, cults are addictive, glad you're better now <3".  I know many such people.  Affirming and respecting their bigotry wasn't what snapped them out of it.

...I mean, I had shitty takes on trans people at first too.  People were firm with me- AKA treated me with *actual* respect by calling out how I was wrong.  That's been true on more political issues as well.  Appeasement doesn't work and it's infantalizing.

I find this... deeply concerning. These parts in particular.

The people spinning lies to incite hatred should be stopped.  With state violence if necessary, AKA fines and whatever.

They don't deserve respect for that, they need deprogramming. 

Kindness WILL NOT change their mind.

Though those advocating for it always consider it necessary, history teaches us how vile 'deprogramming' is.

Also:

Appeasement doesn't work and it's infantalizing.

Yea, appeasement is infantilising and a stupid idea. It's still not as stupid, nor as infantilising, as enforcing a nanny state over thought/belief.

Frankly, your manipulative approach would probably make the issue MUCH more pronounced. A Crusade may get you Jerusalem - but not for long.

The best way to convince those willing to be convinced? Conversation, personal example, and treating people with respect - which I am going to call the 'kindness' approach.

Which seems to have been the method which worked for you, depending on the form/aggression of the 'calling out.'

Edit: I think most concerning for me is that your approach, boiled down, is 'fight hatred with hatred.'

[Great Order]

I can agree with Rolan with regards to stuff like media sources straight up lying (And things like Fox "news" shouldn't be allowed to hide behind "Oh we're actually an entertainment channel not a news channel") because they wield a disproportionate amount of power and them lying can do serious harm. Retractions the same size as the original lie, eg a lying frontpage headline requires a frontpage headline retraction, a 5 minute bit requires a 5 minute retraction, etc. etc. area a good idea, with fines and perhaps add escalating punishment for them, possibly including prison time for those responsible for repeated lies. Maybe even banning them if they just won't stop.

And I'm iffy on the idea of not responding to certain groups/individuals with some sort of force of law. Not the "I don't like X group" types, but the "Murder X group" types, because that's basically stochastic terrorism. That would mean going "Don't kill them *wink wink nudge nudge*" as well because otherwise they'll hide behind the idea they didn't tell them to straight up murder someone so they can't be held accountable for it happening.

[Strongpoint]

When people use the word respect they usually mean either

1. Feeling of admiration for someone who they believe has good qualities
or
2. Politness and fair treatment of someone

I had a guy living on my street who spent twenty or so years in prison for various violent crimes. In fact, my neighborhood was full of people like him, he just was quite talkative. Did I ever respect him? Of course not. Did I treat him with respect and was polite? Yes. Should I explain why?

And this experience, among other things, makes me horrified when people seriously propose to deny the second type of respect to people who are already prone to violence and conflict to "teach them a lesson", "put them in their place", or "make them understand their wrongdoings and repent". The result will NOT be pleasant. If you do that on a personal scale, you risk a knife in your guts. If you do that on a state scale, you risk an armed uprising.

[None]

Hmm, nope. For someone whose joy is in kicking over sandcastles, I'm not giving them the politeness to handle mine. They'll find a reason whether you give them one or not.

[TD1]

Hmm, nope. For someone whose joy is in kicking over sandcastles, I'm not giving them the politeness to handle mine. They'll find a reason whether you give them one or not.

Ehhh, I agree that sometimes you need to defend yourself. In practice, though, life is full of grey areas. And sometimes, you end up attacking someone who doesn't deserve it. This comes to mind.

Politeness should be exercised where possible, until the alternative is forced on you.

[Strongpoint]

Hmm, nope. For someone whose joy is in kicking over sandcastles, I'm not giving them the politeness to handle mine. They'll find a reason whether you give them one or not.

Being polite and refusing to defend yourself are not the same. Is it polite to punch someone in the face? No. It is extremely impolite. But if you are attacked it is not a matter of politeness.

Then, if you are attacked and defeat someone in a fistfight, you still don't have any moral grounds to do something degrading, like... let's say, stripping the person naked, and claiming that you did the right thing because they don't deserve respect.

[Rolan7]

Hmm, nope. For someone whose joy is in kicking over sandcastles, I'm not giving them the politeness to handle mine. They'll find a reason whether you give them one or not.

Ehhh, I agree that sometimes you need to defend yourself. In practice, though, life is full of grey areas. And sometimes, you end up attacking someone who doesn't deserve it. This comes to mind.

Politeness should be exercised where possible, until the alternative is forced on you.

Calls for politeness and respectability all too often mean "accept oppression and don't complain". Making bigots feel bad is good. Bigots are cowards who crumple under criticism unless they're allowed to reach critical mass. Letting an "on the fence moderate" feel like big brained or an ally for only supporting *some* oppression is bad and insulting. Rights have never been won solely by being nice. There was always civil unrest driving authority to the table (with the nice, presentable leaders).

Things are really, really fucking bad. I still love being trans, I'm not angry all the time like bigots seem to be, but I don't owe anyone a comforting illusion about the state of transphobia right now.

Related, I'm finally going swimming at the beach with my dad next Monday. I'm going to be in a swimsuit. I've been extremely polite, always hiding my tits, and he still insists on misgendering every trans person including me and my partner.

Appeasement doesn't work yet I keep trying it. Then hating myself for it. Well too late, I've already told him I'm going to be visibly femme. "Whatever makes you comfortable" damn straight. I hate that he'll be uncomfortable but he forced the issue by failing to respect people I love, including me, despite me making it as easy on him as I could bear. And then some.

This cost me my relationship with my brother too, back in May. I thought I could trust him, he acted like an ally. Nope. Being NB was fine but being a woman disgusts him. Sucks to suck, I hope he's happier without me. Not like he EVER believed me about the anti-trans legislation, and only wanted to whine about the free speech rights of bigots.

Appeasement. Doesn't. Work.

And Nazis SHOULD be deprogrammed. That's not fuckin shock therapy or castration, you know, the stuff that was done to us and sometimes still is. It's simply making them exist around the targets of their hate until they realize their targets are human beings. This *happened*, you can look it up. Still happens for survivors of modern cults. It should have happened following the civil war too but the South won reconstruction.

No justice, no peace.

[Strongpoint]

And Nazis SHOULD be deprogrammed. That's not fuckin shock therapy or castration, you know, the stuff that was done to us and sometimes still is. It's simply making them exist around the targets of their hate until they realize their targets are human beings.

Using the word deprogrammed to describe what is essentially "being forced to tolerate a group of people, treat them fairly, respect their rights and allow them to express their opinion" is creating a wrong impression. It is not that far away from saying "racists should be genocided" meaning that you want to there be no racists in the world.

Appeasement doesn't work yet I keep trying it. Then hating myself for it. Well too late

Indeed appeasement doesn't work. But being respectful and polite is not the same as appeasement. A firm polite "no, it won't be your way" or "I believe you are wrong", or "stop doing that if you want to have good relationships with me" are neither appeasement nor disrespect.

Letting an "on the fence moderate" feel like big brained or an ally for only supporting *some* oppression is bad and insulting

I am curious, how would you define "an ally of LGBTQI+ or an ally of the trans community?" What are the minimum requirements for you to consider a person an ally?

[EuchreJack]

Hey, did you know that if you type LGBTQ into Google on a smartphone, you get a celebration? Flag, confetti, small parade, it was cool!

[jipehog]

And Nazis SHOULD be deprogrammed.

Curiously this is the same language(reformat not deprogram) that were used by Russia prior to their invasion of Ukraine.

[Criptfeind]

And Nazis SHOULD be deprogrammed.

Curiously this is the same language(reformat not deprogram) that were used by Russia prior to their invasion of Ukraine.

They've also said that they are invading to stop a ongoing genocide the Russian speaking population.

[jipehog]

Rolan (or maybe magma?) also said there is an ongoing genocide of Trans people. That why keep saying that people should not confuse the political game (with media sensationalism etc) with reality.

[Criptfeind]

Rolan (or maybe magma?) also said there is an ongoing genocide of Trans people. That why keep saying that people should not confuse the political game (with media sensationalism etc) with reality.

That's basically my point here. To spell it out, comparing what someone says to the rhetoric of a nation invading another is super disingenuous. Russia is constantly lying about their motivation and aims, so when you compare their statements to statements of others you are, at best, being pretty insulting with the comparison. And it sounds a fucking lot like you're saying "this rhetoric is bad because Russia uses it" but they also say obvious things like "genocide is bad and we should stop it" to justify their bad actions, but I doubt you'd go so far as to say means that that's a false statement.

That why keep saying that people should not confuse the political game (with media sensationalism etc) with reality.

There's some irony to this statement in particular, but instead of going after insinuations, I'll leave it to you to make actual claims if you want.

[jipehog]

Or its a good example of where such rhetoric leads. And you pad you dislike with insulting literal fixation.