[Politics] What matters more? My Sex or my Race? (Interesting MCU conversation explored)

[Specter Von Baren]

I've noticed more and more of my fellow aspies acting... snobbish in regards to talking about NT's on forums which I feel is another sign of us having more power in the public sphere that they feel they can act that way.

That and the usual self-important narcissism so many forms of activism tend to develop.

Mm... it certainly depresses me to see them do it but I suppose it is just a fact of life.

It stuns me that people who support Trump complain I am uncivil. Oh wait, its because they don't actually care about civility, they just care about keeping people like me oppressed.

You agree with Dreiko. Thats the problem. Because you should not agree with Dreiko on this topic.

I'm not sure why Trump is suddenly a part of this topic. The rest of your point just proves what I just said.

Edit: It occurs to me that you may misunderstand what I meant when I said Dreiko made my point already. I was referring to their first post in this thread, anything else they've said I have no strong opinion about as of yet.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Well if we're going by that definition, I have to question why you think it's unfalsifiable. I mean, is the idea really that hard to falsify? Is it really that hard to look at the oppression of group A and say "yup, this has nothing to do with the oppression of group B?" I mean really?

I think we both knew that I was talking about the existence of intersectionality in the world around us and not the theory of intersectionality.

You know, you make me scratch my head. You don't say anything about the conclusions that society makes about intersectionality being wrong. You just more or less say that it should be discarded because it hasn't fixed all of those problems yet. You just bring up the progressive stack as saying how there's a problem with it. The problem being that I have never actually seen this encouraged by people who encourage intersectionality. Ok. Here's the thing though. Also, from my research on Kyriarchy, I see no real difference between it and intersectionality. The closest I found to it being different was someone saying it was a useful tool. For intersectionality feminists. So it seems that what you consider to be a superior alternative, the people who practice it see it as a part of the thing you want it to be separate from. Really does feel like a separate term for the same idea. Oh, BTW, has Kyriarchy "yielded solid policy proposals, or prioritized activism or direct action to achieve forthcoming policy goals." I really would love to hear more about how the two are so different when I feel like a rose by any other name is in full effect. Would love to know how this is free of the progressive stack too. Also, people can't explain or stand by intersectionality? Yeah, Geth's existence in this thread dismisses that notion.

No, I find it to be a fair comparison. I mean, you got to compare intersectionality to communism, I hardly find my comparison to be outlandish compared to that. You talk about how intersectionality is no good because it can't be used for direct policy proposals or activism. Racism clearly isn't over in America and plenty of people are still looking to MLK's lessons for solutions. By your logic, we should follow the same path as you proposer for intersectionality because MLK's lessons haven't lead to policy proposals or prioritize activism in the modern age. So why should his lessons be treated differently from intersectionality? Explain it to me.

Snip

Dreiko? Have you ever been part of a marginalized group? Have you ever had in-depth talks with them? Because you don't talk like it. They are struggling, in some cases their very livelihoods and right to be treated as equals is at threat. And you just want them to not be angry and be grateful as to how it could be worse?

They don't have time for your hollow feelgood crap. They know more than you ever could about how you deal with hardship. It isn't about patting yourself on the back and talking about how good it really is. I invite you to find one person on this website who agrees with that and who actually is marginalized in some way. But you won't find them.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Dreiko? Have you ever been part of a marginalized group? Have you ever had in-depth talks with them? Because you don't talk like it. They are struggling, in some cases their very livelihoods and right to be treated as equals is at threat. And you just want them to not be angry and be grateful as to how it could be worse?

They don't have time for your hollow feelgood crap. They know more than you ever could about how you deal with hardship. It isn't about patting yourself on the back and talking about how good it really is. I invite you to find one person on this website who agrees with that and who actually is marginalized in some way. But you won't find them.

I don't feel like I have but I think it really depends on what you decide to describe as "marginalized". Does having a foreign accent count? Being an immigrant? I dunno. I don't count it but there can be others who do.

I know that I could come up with a bunch of things that sound less ridiculous than a lot of things I've seen others claim were marginalized due to (such as those oppressed fat people I spoke of above) and claim I am, but I do not honestly feel that that's true. I know I could claim to be in a way that would silence the politically correct, and while it would be a factual statement, it wouldn't be an honest one since irrespective of those minor factors I still don't feel like I am marginalized.

Hence, it's not about what you've experienced but more about how you tackle and process it that really matters. It's about deciding to see yourself as a victim or a victor. I choose to see those things as the regular normal hardships everyone has to deal with and they differ from those other folks face because everyone's life is different. The specific manner in which they differ potentially being something shared by others with a similar background to mine is completely meaningless and I put no significance to it. They still are different people and I'm me.


But yeah as for talking, I've got a very good friend who is trans and I met her before the online tumblerites ruined the name of their community so I knew that they were just the crazy outliers and that normal trans people are not militant and politically correct. I flat out told her "I see boobs so my mind thinks 'she'" and she wasn't an asshole about me "misgendering" her since she identified as a bisexual dude. She just didn't want to be treated as a girl in ways that exclude her from "guy talk" and she wanted folks to use her new name and stuff like that, it didn't bother her how I still thought of her as a girl. So yeah, I learned that most people really don't give a damn about these issues and it's just a loud vocal minority who want to feel like they're doing something that's causing all the weird culture wars.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

You chose to see governments specifically targeting groups as the same hardships everyone has to deal with. That's a drastic oversimplification if I ever heard one.

You talked to one person, therefore you know the opinions of most people. Your math is a little backwards. Also normal trans people are...ok with the wrong genders being used. Uh. No. No they aren't. Your friend doesn't have a problem with it, and that's fine by him, but to act like that opinion is in anyway the reflection of the majority is just fine proof that when you talk to marginalized groups, you should talk to more than one. The fact that you dismiss anyone who takes issue with their respected genders not being used as "crazy outliers" is, frankly, a slap in the face to me. Also "ruined the name of their community." Yeah...such a trans ally. Also, what you call politically correct in regards to trans people, most people who give a damn about the trans community regard as basic manners.

 

[Drathnoxis]

Well I am glad I am male because I don't have to go through Pregnancy and Periods. Those sound like agony.

It's not that bad.

Being a man is way harder!

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Snip

You chose to see governments specifically targeting groups as the same hardships everyone has to deal with. That's a drastic oversimplification if I ever heard one.

You talked to one person, therefore you know the opinions of most people. Your math is a little backwards. Also normal trans people are...ok with the wrong genders being used. Uh. No. No they aren't. Your friend doesn't have a problem with it, and that's fine by him, but to act like that opinion is in anyway the reflection of the majority is just fine proof that when you talk to marginalized groups, you should talk to more than one. The fact that you dismiss anyone who takes issue with their respected genders not being used as "crazy outliers" is, frankly, a slap in the face to me. Also "ruined the name of their community." Yeah...such a trans ally. Also, what you call politically correct in regards to trans people, most people who give a damn about the trans community regard as basic manners.

Err, I didn't say that my friend was the only one I ever talked to anywhere, right? I'm pretty sure I didn't. She's just the biggest example. And I never claimed (nor do I want to be foisted with) the loaded term of "ally" in this context as it denotes a certain degree of subservience and lack of initiative I despise. I don't give a damn about any community in general terms, I only give damns about individuals from each community based on their personal traits. The fact that I don't exclude or preferentially treat any group is true equality, even if it's shape doesn't lead to quite your desired outcome.

And no, taking issue is a pastime for people whereas normally you just ignore someone who is being rude and go on with your life. The people who shout "IT'S MAAM" at GameStop workers are not (and you shouldn't want them to be if you care for trans acceptance) normal examples and if you find them to be that's just your bubble.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

You gave me no reason to suspect otherwise. Also. Ally...subservient. Where do you get these notions? Exactly? Only lunatics care about being referred to the gender they identify as, allies are subservient and lack initiative. Tell me, do I strike you as someone who lacks initiative or is subservient? Being an ally to the LGBT community requires you to have a fire in your belly. Also you don't give a damn about any community in general terms. With all due respect Dreiko, that's a highly unproductive mindset. Maybe in a better time we can afford to not care about communities and just see a mass of individuals. But that is not a time we live in now, nor is it a time we will live in anytime soon. Equality requires a level playing field, which we don't have. Ignoring that and pretending that you're being equal by not paying attention to the struggles of individual communities gets nothing done and is just giving yourself a pat on the back.

I detect a bit of false dilemma here. You seem to be implying that trans people are divided into people who either don't care at all about being referred do by the correct gender and those who freak out at the drop of a hat. If this is accurate, I can tell you, it's a shallow take on the trans community. Gotta say though, I find it telling how critical you are about trans people, only having nice things to say about the ones that let you call them whatever you prefer. It doesn't say good things.

 

[Seanchaidh]

While I certainly don't object to casting choices moving away from cishet white men (and politely applaud such, as I'm not someone who needs to see a skin-deep representation of myself in every piece of media I consume, but can recognize the benefit of seeing such a skin-deep representation at least some of the time), I also am skeptical of the value of these movies in general. Which is probably why I mostly haven't watched them. Go figure.

Anyway, to answer the question: neither is more important than the other. And indeed, they don't simply add together in a straightforward way, such that one's experience of being a black man is the sum of one's experience being black and one's experience of being a man. They're not reducible in that way; mixing the experiences of a white man with those of a black woman would not give you the experiences of a black man, even if you tried to pick out only the experiences of each in which manhood and blackness were the salient features; you'd be leaving out quite a bit.

Does what I say suck, but still being a man for the most part makes up for whatever I have to endure? Should people be more open minded than what it appears from the outside?

No, being a man doesn't make up for it, and yes, people ought to be more open-minded about all that.

 

[Satinavian]

Too many men think equality with women means that women get to get away with not paying for dinner while getting as much money as men.

Is this really a thing in America ? It certainly is not here. Not even when on a date.

I think the problem with equality between men and women is how to measure it. The pay gap is a prime example. Sure, it exists, but why exactly and is it really a proof of discrimination ? That is not the only thing, but it is a pretty typical example.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Too many men think equality with women means that women get to get away with not paying for dinner while getting as much money as men.

Is this really a thing in America ? It certainly is not here. Not even when on a date.

I think the problem with equality between men and women is how to measure it. The pay gap is a prime example. Sure, it exists, but why exactly and is it really a proof of discrimination ? That is not the only thing, but it is a pretty typical example.

As we have discussed before, sexism is still pretty rampant in the Southern US. Many men here still do not even think women should work and are outspoken against having to accommodate them in the workplace. Yes, there are plenty of men here who think that it is emasculating to have women earn as much as they do and to have a woman pay for dinner is an insult, and an embarrassment to them.

 

[Agema]

In my eyes, saying to someone "you're a man so you have to take a step back and let women's opinions rule the discourse" is no different than saying to someone "95% of people are not gay so you by definition can't be gay cause you're a person".

This all looks to me like a straw man.

There are obviously parts of the discourse where one demographic group (as per the example you supplied, women) must have priority. Imagine we want to discuss harassment of women on the street. One part of this must be asking women what their experiences are, and this really is a point men should take a baseline stance of shutting the fuck up.

That's not to say men aren't going to have interesting and important things to add somewhere in the process of discussing street harassment. But you can guarantee, and I've seen it a million times, some women will be discussing what it's like to be sexually pestered as they go about their business, and some man is going to interject and explain their experiences to them and how they should feel about it.

In fact, it's exactly this sort of thing that generated concepts like "safe spaces": because people who wanted to discuss things found it too difficult. Obviously the same big I ams intent on imposing their arrogant, spouting bullshit then started complaining about safe spaces, because they would resent not being able to impose their spouting bullshit on the general convesation.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

But you can guarantee, and I've seen it a million times, some women will be discussing what it's like to be sexually pestered as they go about their business, and some man is going to interject and explain their experiences to them and how they should feel about it.

Can someone explain why people do this? Sexual pestering someone they don't know. Or even doing it in general.

I always thought it was because I am introvert why I don't do this, but I can't believe it's a successful action. No woman I know speaks of this favorably. To me, it's like trying to bully an owner of a company to get a job and being surprised that it didn't work.

 

[Seanchaidh]

But you can guarantee, and I've seen it a million times, some women will be discussing what it's like to be sexually pestered as they go about their business, and some man is going to interject and explain their experiences to them and how they should feel about it.

Can someone explain why people do this? Sexual pestering someone they don't know. Or even doing it in general.

I always thought it was because I am introvert why I don't do this, but I can't believe it's a successful action. No woman I know speaks of this favorably. To me, it's like trying to bully an owner of a company to get a job and being surprised that it didn't work.

Same reason one might harass someone in another way, I'd think. It's supposed to be amusing more than actually achieve a specific result.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

This is all to say that the situation has been laid out that there are a lot of injustices in the world with a really slim finite amount of empathy. And it seems like we all as Minorities, LGBTQ, and Women.... and any iteration that comes from those groups, we're all fighting for that spotlight to make things a little more livable. It feels like a lot more would be done for the world if we stop trying to get the spotlight to focus on one of our iterations, and just widen the beam to humanity in order to figure out how we can just be together.

As I said recently in another thread, I don't think empathy is a finite resource. Rather, I believe empathy is the exact opposite. The more empathy you give and show, the more empathy you will have. It is when we withhold, ration or make our empathy conditional that we also throttle our own ability for empathy. When we say stuff like "maybe a black man shouldn't be looking threatening in the streets if he doesn't want the police to notice him", "she had a rape coming with a skirt that short" or "he has only himself to blame with that drug addiction, he could have just never started", that's when stymie our own ability to understand the realities of other people.

I think you're totally right in that we need to try and see all of it, to understand the many and diverse structural problems society has that prevents peoples of all genders, ethnicities and classes from living a full and happy life. The problem is that people who suffer, for whatever reason, are seldom very good at being balanced and reasonable in regards to their own suffering. It is all natural and not something you can be faulted for, we have evolved to prioritize removing threats to ourselves after all, but it creates this big problem where you can see that someone else is suffering but still feel that your own suffering is much more important. It obviously is, to you, but perhaps not to everyone else. At the same time, people who don't suffer often have a hard time understanding why all these suffering people are so insistent, rude or obnoxious and fail to really understand the extent of the problem. Shit, just look at this thread to see a few guys with privilege try to tell others that their problems are not really problems.

It is the Gordian knot of social justice really, that everyone needs to work together to create a just and equal society, yet no one wants to stand back and let others have their issues resolved before their own. And then there are a bunch of assholes around the world who just doesn't care about anyone who isn't them or theirs.

 

[Saelune]

I've noticed more and more of my fellow aspies acting... snobbish in regards to talking about NT's on forums which I feel is another sign of us having more power in the public sphere that they feel they can act that way.

That and the usual self-important narcissism so many forms of activism tend to develop.

Mm... it certainly depresses me to see them do it but I suppose it is just a fact of life.

It stuns me that people who support Trump complain I am uncivil. Oh wait, its because they don't actually care about civility, they just care about keeping people like me oppressed.

You agree with Dreiko. Thats the problem. Because you should not agree with Dreiko on this topic.

I'm not sure why Trump is suddenly a part of this topic. The rest of your point just proves what I just said.

Edit: It occurs to me that you may misunderstand what I meant when I said Dreiko made my point already. I was referring to their first post in this thread, anything else they've said I have no strong opinion about as of yet.

I brought Trump up because when Trump supporters criticize me for being uncivil, it is hypocritical because they and Trump are uncivil. Thus I am saying that your condemning of me is hypocritical.

And again, you agree with Dreiko, you should not agree with Dreiko, because Dreiko is wrong. He was wrong with his first post, he was wrong with every post after. Dreiko wants to simultaneously pretend bigotry doesn't exist at all, while claiming that it is straight white men who are actually persecuted.

 

[Saelune]

Too many men think equality with women means that women get to get away with not paying for dinner while getting as much money as men.

Is this really a thing in America ? It certainly is not here. Not even when on a date.

I think the problem with equality between men and women is how to measure it. The pay gap is a prime example. Sure, it exists, but why exactly and is it really a proof of discrimination ? That is not the only thing, but it is a pretty typical example.

Yes this is really a thing. It is probably a thing where you are too, you just probably ignore it. Maybe intentionally, maybe unintentionally, but it exists.

Just because you do not personally see or experience a problem, does not mean it does not exist. I myself have fallen folly to that by the way.

 

[Satinavian]

Yes this is really a thing. It is probably a thing where you are too, you just probably ignore it. Maybe intentionally, maybe unintentionally, but it exists.

No, it is not. People pay for themself, if it is not some kind of special celebration and gender is irrelevant for that.

Just because you do not personally see or experience a problem, does not mean it does not exist. I myself have fallen folly to that by the way.

Yes, there are thse kinds of problems that i don't experience and thus might underestimate. "Who is expected to pay the bills when eating out" is no such thing. I have been occasionally eating out basically my whole life and with a huge number of different people and can quite confident say "The man pays" is not actually a thing in this country. I also have read travel guides that mentioned everyone paying on his own as the proper local etiquette. Why do you think you know that better ?

 

[Erttheking]

Yes this is really a thing. It is probably a thing where you are too, you just probably ignore it. Maybe intentionally, maybe unintentionally, but it exists.

No, it is not. People pay for themself, if it is not some kind of special celebration and gender is irrelevant for that.

Just because you do not personally see or experience a problem, does not mean it does not exist. I myself have fallen folly to that by the way.

Yes, there are thse kinds of problems that i don't experience and thus might underestimate. "Who is expected to pay the bills when eating out" is no such thing. I have been occasionally eating out basically my whole life and with a huge number of different people and can quite confident say "The man pays" is not actually a thing in this country. I also have read travel guides that mentioned everyone paying on his own as the proper local etiquette. Why do you think you know that better ?

Universally? No. But we gotta keep in mind just how flipping massive the United States is. Culture changes a lot when you move around, particularly in the Bible Belt.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

You just more or less say that it should be discarded because it hasn't fixed all of those problems yet.

No, I'm not saying "it hasn't fixed all those problems yet". I'm saying it's incapable of generating policy proposals and directing activism in a meaningful way to translate proposals into policy. You can't expect results from a theory incapable of generating results to begin with.

Also, from my research on Kyriarchy, I see no real difference between it and intersectionality.

The key difference is that within kyriarchy, vectors of privilege and oppression can be ordered and means of doing so are offered, while acknowledging that as society and policy changes so do the relations between those vectors. This provides a toolkit for prioritizing action and policy proposals, because higher-order and shared struggles can be identified and selectively targeted for mutual benefit of all parties in turn. Again, my issue is with applicability, the capacity of theories to shape policy, and ultimately the ability of the theory to organize and direct action to effect policy.

Oh, BTW, has Kyriarchy "yielded solid policy proposals, or prioritized activism or direct action to achieve forthcoming policy goals."

You challenge this statement, yet you keep bringing up MLK. Funny thing about MLK, he didn't stop with the passage of the Civil Rights Act; afterwards he challenged racial discrimination in housing in the North (funny how people forget that), and after he pivoted to a whole different major civil rights issue. No, it wasn't Vietnam; his opposition to Vietnam was in service to it. What was it?

Now, apply this to the civil rights movement in sum. They identified key issues, appealed to shared struggles to build consensus and direct action, and leveraged policy successes based upon that action (and the political capital earned by it) to tackle higher-order issues in turn. Needless to say the strategy yielded the greatest civil rights successes seen in the US, period.

Well, that is until taking aim at one civil rights issue in particular. What was MLK planning to speak about the day he was shot, again?

Compare that to today, after thirty years' of intersectionality being the dominant paradigm in civil rights and activist discourse. Where are we now? Because last I checked, Roe's overturned in all but name and cops are still blowing away black people in the streets for vacation time.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

As I said recently in another thread, I don't think empathy is a finite resource. Rather, I believe empathy is the exact opposite. The more empathy you give and show, the more empathy you will have. It is when we withhold, ration or make our empathy conditional that we also throttle our own ability for empathy. When we say stuff like "maybe a black man shouldn't be looking threatening in the streets if he doesn't want the police to notice him", "she had a rape coming with a skirt that short" or "he has only himself to blame with that drug addiction, he could have just never started", that's when stymie our own ability to understand the realities of other people.

I think you're totally right in that we need to try and see all of it, to understand the many and diverse structural problems society has that prevents peoples of all genders, ethnicities and classes from living a full and happy life. The problem is that people who suffer, for whatever reason, are seldom very good at being balanced and reasonable in regards to their own suffering. It is all natural and not something you can be faulted for, we have evolved to prioritize removing threats to ourselves after all, but it creates this big problem where you can see that someone else is suffering but still feel that your own suffering is much more important. It obviously is, to you, but perhaps not to everyone else. At the same time, people who don't suffer often have a hard time understanding why all these suffering people are so insistent, rude or obnoxious and fail to really understand the extent of the problem. Shit, just look at this thread to see a few guys with privilege try to tell others that their problems are not really problems.

It is the Gordian knot of social justice really, that everyone needs to work together to create a just and equal society, yet no one wants to stand back and let others have their issues resolved before their own. And then there are a bunch of assholes around the world who just doesn't care about anyone who isn't them or theirs.

You have no idea how much I wish to agree with you. But in this very thread, we've had someone claim that it is unfair to think about others because everyone is so used to one segment of the population being focused on, that those previously focused on people will have their happiness stripped away at that point.

We all have capability of Empathy. Kindness, Warmth, A unifying strength that could make Humanity undefeatable. I truly know that. Not believe, know.

But people need to choose to be that way. Just like no one is truly evil, but there are evil people out there. There has to be a choice in what you're doing.

I do not see people choosing Empathy. I sadly see people choose self-centered goals, and short sighted ideals. Our planet is dying, and we still have a segment of people who are concerned that if we just stop doing the things we're doing that is destroying our only world, how will that affect their ability to get their iphones?

I see that in Politics. Greece's Golden Dawn is is the third major political party, complete with actual Neo-Nazis holding office. AfD is still alarming people all over Germany, even though it's rose to being again, the third major party in the polls. Matteo Salvini and Lega has taken Italy by storm. Rassemblement National, France's Far-right party, is now seeing a bit of a lead in front of Macron.

"Not you, but Me" is at the heart of all these parties. And they are gaining support every day.

That's why I say there's a slim amount of Empathy to go around. Everyone's fighting a political war. And people have to admit to themselves if someone is equal to them, then that means they do have a seat at the table with resources and focus is divided up. The way politics is going now, I doubt more than half of the world's population really do want that.

But I'd be ever so glad to be wrong in this case.