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

[Agema]

I do not see people choosing Empathy.

Well, some people are very low on empathy: like, sociopaths and narcissists, etc.

But empathy has to compete with lots of things. Take the boss of a company: would you rather have $1M or refuse to fire workers? Well, I guess a lot of people will take the $1M. The fired workers then might have envy and resentment, even vengeance contesting against empathy. Then there's plain old hatred. There's also defensiveness: if you see others suffering, it potentially generates guilt (that you might be partially contributing to it), or anxiety (fear that it might happen to you), and it can be easier to erase that psychological discomfort by blaming others.

But I think Gethsemani is right that empathy is not a limited resource or a zero sum game. It needs to be worked on, encouraged. The far right, however, is all about playing on fear, hate, disgust and so on to make everyone less empathetic. One might say they perhaps encourage in-group empathy at the expense of out-group, but I'm not sure that's really true either.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

I do not see people choosing Empathy.

Well, some people are very low on empathy: like, sociopaths and narcissists, etc.

But empathy has to compete with lots of things. Take the boss of a company: would you rather have $1M or refuse to fire workers? Well, I guess a lot of people will take the $1M. The fired workers then might have envy and resentment, even vengeance contesting against empathy. Then there's plain old hatred. There's also defensiveness: if you see others suffering, it potentially generates guilt (that you might be partially contributing to it), or anxiety (fear that it might happen to you), and it can be easier to erase that psychological discomfort by blaming others.

But I think Gethsemani is right that empathy is not a limited resource or a zero sum game. It needs to be worked on, encouraged. The far right, however, is all about playing on fear, hate, disgust and so on to make everyone less empathetic. One might say they perhaps encourage in-group empathy at the expense of out-group, but I'm not sure that's really true either.

Empathy will be a limited resource due to how much people want to give out. I think we are capable of infinite Empathy. But we choose not to be. What we're capable of versus how we are is an interesting debate, but it sadly becomes academic when we're presented with what's actually happening in the world.

I'll say again. I want people to be more Empathetic. I think I hold myself in a manner that... well, that's my thing. I want to be there for others because I believe it in my soul to be the right thing to do. However, I have to sadly deal with how people actually are. And that is the mess we're all in now.

To the far right thing, I think that sums up how I see the world. Fear and hatred is a far amount easier to spread compassion and Empathy. This wounds me, because I know we're all capable of it. But I have to deal with what's really here.

Don't get me wrong. We obviously have bright spots. But they are the exception.

 

[Saelune]

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 ?

Why do YOU think YOU know that better? You seem damn well sure of yourself.
Look, if your country is so damn enlightened, then good for you. No really. But that hardly makes you an expert of the US, now does it? But go on, tell me I know my country less than you do.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Incapable of directing activism. Hm. Let me do something magical. "The Republican party is racist and homophobic. The LGBT community and feminists should stand together." EGAGS! I just proposed a form of activism using intersectionality. Madness I tell you, madness. If you're looking for specific issues, we can look at, oh just off of the top of my head, abuse, sexual harassment, abortion rights, I'm just spitballing here. Also, we can direct it at feminism to point out that feminism can have a problem with being mainly for white women.

You know, the only real difference you've actually given me to have a difference between Intersectionality and Kyriarchy is apparently Kyriarchy has a list that depicts the winners and losers of the oppression Olympics that I thought you hated so much. Vectors of oppression can be ordered. Oh, ok. Would you like to share the results of that ordering?

Roe's been overturned in all but name (A gross oversimplification but whatever) and cops are still blowing away black people. So, in other words, Kyriarchy hasn't" yielded solid policy proposals, or prioritized activism or direct action to achieve forthcoming policy goals." Same, you were talking up such a big game about it, it's a bit disappointing to hear it's done so little. Also, I feel like you shot your own argument in the foot there, talking about how successful MLK was before going on to talk about how black people are still getting killed. Can you get your narrative straight, please?

Then again, this all relies on the fact that apparently, intersectionality can't get common goals organized, ignoring things like the 2017 Women's March being about LGBT rights and racial equality in addition to feminism. And it being the biggest single-day march in American history And tell me, what would your precious Kyriarchy have done differently?

 

[Specter Von Baren]

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, it doesn't matter that you act like that because of how Trump supporters act. If a drunk driver runs over a girl, it doesn't matter of the drunk driver was drunk because she just lost her job after 10 years of hard work at the company, it doesn't change that what they did was wrong.

This is why your petulant attitude bugs me so much. I've never wanted people to just give me free reign to act however I want because of my autism, I have always just wanted them to know that I'm not doing it deliberately and that I can CHANGE if they work with me to do so. You refuse to better yourself and instead take the hardships and pain you feel to mean you get carte blanche to act like you do. You revel in the fact that you act as bad as the people you hate so it naturally rings hollow when you start saying how bad acting like that is.

 

[Trunkage]

It's the same problem with Racism. Their definition of civility is not in line with yours, and generally they make it up on the spot instead of having to deal with an argument.

Racism: "Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."

Civility: "Formal politeness and courtesy in behaviour or speech."

It isn't hard.

Well, fuck. If only we had you a few months ago when we did those 10 page threads on Racism and Civility in R&P. Because those definition you provided definitely aren't in any possible way ambiguous, nor could they be interpreted differently by different people.

Eg. I think calling homosexuals abominable, evil, sinful and that they destroying society is uncivil. Christian Conservatives (or Muslims, for that matter) think that is civil

Those same people think calling people who have abortions baby murders. I would say that's uncivil.

I think saying that African Americans being enslaved was eventually beneficial for them is a racist statement. People like Sam Harris and Richard Spencer do not think its racist.

But please, go on about how your definition cures all the world problems.

The same issues arises with Captain America. Him being white man makes it hard for some people to connect with him, just like Black Panther is harder for some white people to connect with, or Danvers is hard for some men to connect with.

...and?

I don't doubt there might be some people whose ability to connect to fictional characters is dependent on their skin colour or gender. That said, I'd raise an eyebrow at the notion. If someone says "I can't connect with Carol Danvers because I'm not a white woman," that says far more about the person than the character.

I'm white and male. I have trouble connecting to Cap because I've never been patriotic, or served in the military, and generally I'm wary of "boyscout characters" in fiction (least in the MCU, I'll take Tony's snark before Cap's best you can be thing).* In contrast, I can connect to Carol more easily because I've often felt/feel isolated in part of a group (Starforce), and rarely been the most confident person in said group, so as cheesy as it is, the "I'm Just a Girl" sequence is fun, if nothing else. Can't comment on T'Challa since I haven't seen Black Panther, but point being, when I think of the character traits, skin colour and gender are rarely the things that come to mind.

*Though according to a "which Avenger are you?" quiz I'm actually most like Cap, so...yay?

I thought Captain Marvel was way better, but I seem to be in the minority, at least on this forum

Well, I'll second at least that I liked Captain Marvel. It's average, but still, enjoyable. Of the MCU films I've seen, it takes the #10 spot.

Hey, I'm all for well written LBGT characters. LBGT is not a character trait. Just don't expect that to connect with some audience who've never experienced anything like thier world view, especially when they automatically find it deplorable or evil. No amount of writing will ever get over that hurdle

Boy Erased.

Saw that last year, where a teen comes out as gay in his Christian family, which results in family breakdown, and he's forced to attend gay conversion therapy. Believe it or not, despite being not gay, and not Christian, I was able to empathize with the character because the writing/acting/context sold me on the emotional trauma. The ability to empathize in fiction and reality isn't dependent on shared experience.

Really not buying the idea that you need to be the same as a fictional character to connect with them. Like, if that was the case, I'd have never grown up reading Sonic comics because a) I'm not a hedgehog, and b) never been a good runner (flat feet, little bastards).

I actually don't understand why people feel connected to race or gender and it sounds exactly the same for you. But, clearly, many people do.

So, your choice is to... what... say they are idiots for feeling this way? Take it away from people?

Me personally, if I don't understand why people connect like that, I say good for them. It's important to them and it doesn't hurt anybody, certainly not me.

Lastly, as you pointed out, many characters are great becuase they speak to a certain feeling you've had in your life - your Boy Erased and Captain Marvel examples for example. But not everyone has had your experience. Cap for me was way to patriotic for the first movie. Was pretty good in the second, as he felt used by, and chose the hard choice. Which is ruined by the third movie, by hiding a fugitive and betraying Stark. His distaste for government intervention, or even willing to deal with that situation let Thanos win in Infinity War, and Stark calling him out for it in Endgame was exactly how I felt about Cap. Captain America keeps changing personalities. But, for some reason, everyone still loves him and I would deny it has anything to do with his character. He screwed up just as much as Stark and he ran away from problems on multiple occasion. That doesnt sound like a hero to me

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

EGAGS! I just proposed a form of activism using intersectionality.

No you didn't, you just stated the obvious. You're listing off problems and bitching about Republicans without actually proposing anything of real weight, or anything really but a half-hearted, half-assed, vague critique which actually is in agreement with what I have to say.

Which is really the heart of contemporary "activism": for-profit, brand-name bitching about problems without any real effort to solve them, because the "for profit" part means there is a vested financial interest in perpetuating social issues. In the rare case there is actual effort, it is quickly and efficiently silenced and discredited by infighting while profiteers laugh all the way to the bank. And, in the rare case "movements" survive this step, the come out they other side so broadly-focused and rhetorically arcane in an effort to appeal to as many groups as possible in fear of treading on anyone's shoes, organization to yield policy results is impossible.

It's funny you brought up Women's March, because last I checked it's suffered that exact fate. A handful of people made a killing on the speaking circuit and selling merch, record and ticket sales of celebrities who participated went up, and not a whole lot of anything else other than clickbaiting on the op-ed/pundit circuit about how transphobic, homophobic, and antisemitic the movement, its founders, and leaders may or may not be. The estimate for participation in the 2018 Women's March was 5% what it was in 2017, and so few individuals participated this year there aren't even available estimates.

Congratulations for citing a movement even less successful than Occupy. And just like Occupy, this can be directly attributed (in my opinion) to how unfocused and milquetoast the platform of the movement ended up being. "If you try to please everyone, you please no one".

Also, we can direct it at feminism to point out that feminism can have a problem with being mainly for white women.

White, upper-class, educated women with first-world problems, and profiteers.

Can you get your narrative straight, please?

I know you're desperate to change the subject and poke holes in my argument, but there's nothing awry about this and everything I have said has been completely consistent. But, since you're either genuinely not getting where I'm going or simply playing dense, here.

Due to structural and organizational incompetence wrought by chasing the dragon of a philosophically DOA social theory, which enables the dubious leadership of an emergent profiteer/activist class, civil rights activism has weakened to a point we have regressed as a society, in some cases a century or further.

Happy?

 

[Saelune]

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, it doesn't matter that you act like that because of how Trump supporters act. If a drunk driver runs over a girl, it doesn't matter of the drunk driver was drunk because she just lost her job after 10 years of hard work at the company, it doesn't change that what they did was wrong.

This is why your petulant attitude bugs me so much. I've never wanted people to just give me free reign to act however I want because of my autism, I have always just wanted them to know that I'm not doing it deliberately and that I can CHANGE if they work with me to do so. You refuse to better yourself and instead take the hardships and pain you feel to mean you get carte blanche to act like you do. You revel in the fact that you act as bad as the people you hate so it naturally rings hollow when you start saying how bad acting like that is.

I say mean things about people who commit hate crimes, so according to you I am worse than people who commit hate crimes.

This is literally my point, that I am criticized more than the actual bad people.

I am saying drunk driving is terrible, and you are saying I am as bad as people who kill innocent girls with cars.

Or actually it is like saying people who condemn Nazis are 'equal' to actual Nazis who literally murdered Heather Heyer with their car. Ya know, like Trump said.

 

[Saelune]

I am tired of being told I am wrong for standing up to bullies.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Hey, I'm just going by the standards that you set when you were talking about how good Kyriarchy was. Also, I asked you to share the supposed ordering that Kyriarchy has. You failed to do so. Why am I not surprised. Maybe people in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks about bitching. I think you have a bit of an issue in that you suffer from extreme tunnel vision and use it to vent about things you don't like. Complaining about for-profit activism is all fine and dandy, but you act like it's the only form of protest available. And if that's all you see, you aren't looking very hard. I've seen students do walk out protests in favor of gun control to fixing climate change. And before you get all rose-tinted glasses, exactly how many MLK level protests actually happened in the past. How many reached your standards? I doubt there's many.

Oh, people made killings? Cite your sources kindly. Yeah, I kind of notice you're severely lacking there. Making all of these claims and not providing any sources to back it up. Just getting more and more pissed. Also, hate to break it to you, a protest that causes instant change, right now? Those are extremely rare. Most of the time, protesting is constant pressure against vile policies and acts, and you have to keep pushing. MLK and what he did is borderline impossible to recreate. The Women's March was another thrust in the right direction, and you have to keep thrusting, constantly, to make it clear that there is opposition and to provide a voice for the opposition, otherwise things get a lot worse, particularly in a heavily partisan world. Also, this is ignoring what internet activism can do as well. Frankly, let's take a quick look at recent victories Change.org has to offer. Paid maternity leave, cheaper insulin in Colorado, Google removing an app encouraging conversion therapy. And you're also ignoring activism done by non-profit groups such as the ACLU.

https://www.change.org/p/michael-mulgrew-help-nyc-teachers-fight-for-paid-maternity-leave

https://www.change.org/p/colorado-general-assembly-fight-excessively-high-insulin-costs-by-passing-hb19-1216

https://www.change.org/p/demand-google-stop-peddling-dangerous-pray-away-the-gay-app-targeting-lgbt-youth

Poking holes in your argument? Don't really need to do that, it's already doing a good impersonation of a screen door. Except screen doors aren't overly aggressive and sweary at the expense of their arguments. But sure, call me dense to cover up your argument's failings. Also, we've regressed by a century. Riiiiiight. Women lost the right to vote and all the Jim Crow laws came back. Yeah, that sounds about right. The only thing where that's even close to relevant is the fact that we are approaching Gilded Age era wealth disparity, but that's about it.

Happy? Not really. I'm more underwhelmed. You failed to defense your precious Kyriarchy and more just ranted about rich people. Hey, can you actually answer my questions about Kyriarchy? I find it kind of bad faith that you didn't.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

EGAGS! I just proposed a form of activism using intersectionality.

No you didn't, you just stated the obvious. You're listing off problems and bitching about Republicans without actually proposing anything of real weight, or anything really but a half-hearted, half-assed, vague critique which actually is in agreement with what I have to say.

Which is really the heart of contemporary "activism": for-profit, brand-name bitching about problems without any real effort to solve them, because the "for profit" part means there is a vested financial interest in perpetuating social issues. In the rare case there is actual effort, it is quickly and efficiently silenced and discredited by infighting while profiteers laugh all the way to the bank. And, in the rare case "movements" survive this step, the come out they other side so broadly-focused and rhetorically arcane in an effort to appeal to as many groups as possible in fear of treading on anyone's shoes, organization to yield policy results is impossible.

It's funny you brought up Women's March, because last I checked it's suffered that exact fate. A handful of people made a killing on the speaking circuit and selling merch, record and ticket sales of celebrities who participated went up, and not a whole lot of anything else other than clickbaiting on the op-ed/pundit circuit about how transphobic, homophobic, and antisemitic the movement, its founders, and leaders may or may not be. The estimate for participation in the 2018 Women's March was 5% what it was in 2017, and so few individuals participated this year there aren't even available estimates.

Congratulations for citing a movement even less successful than Occupy. And just like Occupy, this can be directly attributed (in my opinion) to how unfocused and milquetoast the platform of the movement ended up being. "If you try to please everyone, you please no one".

Also, we can direct it at feminism to point out that feminism can have a problem with being mainly for white women.

White, upper-class, educated women with first-world problems, and profiteers.

Can you get your narrative straight, please?

I know you're desperate to change the subject and poke holes in my argument, but there's nothing awry about this and everything I have said has been completely consistent. But, since you're either genuinely not getting where I'm going or simply playing dense, here.

Due to structural and organizational incompetence wrought by chasing the dragon of a philosophically DOA social theory, which enables the dubious leadership of an emergent profiteer/activist class, civil rights activism has weakened to a point we have regressed as a society, in some cases a century or further.

Happy?

I've also become a bit cynical after encountering many supposed activist movements that seem more geared towards advancing the careers of the movement's faces and creating spectacle rather than actually working to solve any problems. One of the dead give aways is the word "Awareness". While certainly not always the case, events and fundraisers for "Raising Awareness" generally just serve to put money into the pockets of organizers in order to fund further events and fundraisers in a never ending cycle while not actually contributing anything to the problem they are "raising awareness" about. While some problems are obscure and underrepresented enough that "raising awareness" actually has some merit, usually this isn't the case and organizers are taking advantage of a well know problem to profit off of, because the more people who know about and care about said problem the more money there is to be made. The most egregious example of this is breast cancer. You know all those pink products with the little pink ribbons on them that are absolutely everywhere, even on freaking yogurt? Odds are that money doesn't go to breast cancer research or toward helping the victims of breast cancer, but to "Awareness". Meaning, that money goes toward making more pink things and to paying staff to approach companies and convince them they will see a sales boost and some good PR if they put their little pink ribbon on some of their packaging.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

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.

Any conversation I've seen where "marginalized" people discussed their concept of an "ally" they were talking about what some on the right would describe as a cucked white dude who is there to lend support because their whiteness lends credibility to their voices but someone who is not to be a leader or offer foundational contributions to the effort because that is by definition not his place. I don't know what else you call that but subservient.


And we had the level playing field, that's what it was when everyone was a caveman. You don't fix inequality by applying more inequality to someone else. Who it's applied to isn't the issue, inequality itself is the issue. What you're doing is trying to fix the problem of someone having lost an arm by amputating their other arm too and pretending they were just not supposed to have arms all along. No, society is better having even just one arm as opposed to no arms.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Well of course the right would describe them as a cuck, the right describe anyone who challenges their world view as cucks. And if you're taking them seriously, you're playing right into their hands. Because. *Points at self* I'm an ally. A welcome ally. I've been in and out of safe places for LGBT. You wanna call me subservient? Go ahead. Try it.

Dreiko, did you think that inequality just magically sprang up when agriculture happened? No. Women were not seen as equal to men in the stone age, ergo we did not have a level playing field. What high-school did you go to? And you compare someone wanting to be referred to as their preferred gender with amputating? I will repeat what I said earlier. Get some real problems. If you think the strife that trans people face (someone having lost an arm) is just as bad as having to refer to people by their preferred gender (amputating their other arm) then you must have the thinnest skin in the world. Maybe it's for the best you're not an ally. You want everything to be brought to a screeching halt the second it inconveniences you. I'm going to leave you a quote.

https://jamieutt.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/mlk-cfw.jpg

Dreiko? You are showing shallow understanding and lukewarm acceptance.

 

[Satinavian]

Why do YOU think YOU know that better? You seem damn well sure of yourself.

Look, if your country is so damn enlightened, then good for you. No really. But that hardly makes you an expert of the US, now does it? But go on, tell me I know my country less than you do.

Good thing then that i was talking about MY culture and MY country and not the US.

Which is a topic where i am absolutely certain that I do know better than YOU. And i never claimed i know the US better than you do. Just the opposite. YOU are claiming you know MY reality better than me and that i was probably delusional if my experience does not fit your US-centric worldview :

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.

I did not make a single statement about the US situation in this thread. It is you insisting it must be the same in places you have never been. This kind of hypocricy is hard to believe.

As for it being enlightened, well, i couldn't say because i am not really familiar with the realities in other countries. But considering how YOU describe the US, that might very well be true in comparison. I have never been to the US. But since visiting this forum, my opinion of it has dropped significantly. Because i am willing to listen instead of assuming that it would probably be more or less the same over there anyway.
Yes, still anecdotical evidence, but what Americans post here does not paint a pretty picture at all.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Any conversation I've seen where "marginalized" people discussed their concept of an "ally" they were talking about what some on the right would describe as a cucked white dude who is there to lend support because their whiteness lends credibility to their voices but someone who is not to be a leader or offer foundational contributions to the effort because that is by definition not his place. I don't know what else you call that but subservient.

Sure you could call it subservient. But imagine a corporation if you will, one that operates in a really sensitive market and under some serious constraints, say healthcare. Imagine that this corporation has to pick out a new board of directors, do you think they'd want to choose those guys with business degrees, a literature major and someone who focused on sports psychology or would they want doctors, nurses, healthcare administrators and other people who know the workings of healthcare?

The same applies to marginalized groups. Feminists generally don't want men to be their figureheads by the simple virtue that men don't quite understand the challenges facing women. Black people don't want white people to be the greatest proponents of BLM because white people can't get the particular kind of problems black people face, even if said white person is from the same socioeconomic strata.

You can call it subservience, if you want to be melodramatic. You probably should call it a desire to ensure that the best suited people get to be at the front. The best suited for social movements will always be those who suffer oppression, discrimination or injustice, not the people on the sidelines who might empathize but haven't suffered it themselves. That's not to say that white men (to be really typical) can't make important contributions to feminism or ending racism, but they shouldn't expect to be at the front of a movement that's not about them. To do so is, if you will allow me to be really Tumblrina SJW, a really good definition of White Male Privilege.

 

[Saelune]

Why do YOU think YOU know that better? You seem damn well sure of yourself.

Look, if your country is so damn enlightened, then good for you. No really. But that hardly makes you an expert of the US, now does it? But go on, tell me I know my country less than you do.

Good thing then that i was talking about MY culture and MY country and not the US.

Which is a topic where i am absolutely certain that I do know better than YOU. And i never claimed i know the US better than you do. Just the opposite. YOU are claiming you know MY reality better than me and that i was probably delusional if my experience does not fit your US-centric worldview :

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.

I did not make a single statement about the US situation in this thread. It is you insisting it must be the same in places you have never been. This kind of hypocricy is hard to believe.

As for it being enlightened, well, i couldn't say because i am not really familiar with the realities in other countries. But considering how YOU describe the US, that might very well be true in comparison. I have never been to the US. But since visiting this forum, my opinion of it has dropped significantly. Because i am willing to listen instead of assuming that it would probably be more or less the same over there anyway.
Yes, still anecdotical evidence, but what Americans post here does not paint a pretty picture at all.

 

[Saelune]

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.

Any conversation I've seen where "marginalized" people discussed their concept of an "ally" they were talking about what some on the right would describe as a cucked white dude who is there to lend support because their whiteness lends credibility to their voices but someone who is not to be a leader or offer foundational contributions to the effort because that is by definition not his place. I don't know what else you call that but subservient.


And we had the level playing field, that's what it was when everyone was a caveman. You don't fix inequality by applying more inequality to someone else. Who it's applied to isn't the issue, inequality itself is the issue. What you're doing is trying to fix the problem of someone having lost an arm by amputating their other arm too and pretending they were just not supposed to have arms all along. No, society is better having even just one arm as opposed to no arms.

And yet you wonder why I have the opinion of you that I do.

To use your analogy, you are mad that people with real medical problems want to get medical help before you and your paper cuts.

 

[Satinavian]

//gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/moving-goalposts.jpg

Thank you, but i already know you are great at moving goalposts. No need to demonstrate it again

 

[Saelune]

//gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/moving-goalposts.jpg

Thank you, but i already know you are great at moving goalposts. No need to demonstrate it again

And you wonder why I have the opinion of you that I do.

 

[Satinavian]

And you wonder why I have the opinion of you that I do.

Actually i don't care anymore what your opinion of me is.

But just because you openly declared that you are not willing to behave in a civil manner, doesn't mean everyone else has to accommodate it.

I did cite the relevant parts of your statements. Everyone can read how the conversation went and that it certainly was not me making statements about foreign countries.