Jump to content

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:
27 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

We're constantly hiding one and exposing the other.

Except in Second Life, where it’s reversed!

Is it? I've always thought of the exposed bits I see in SL as reflections of an RL mind, not necessarily that mind's RL bits.

If I'm wrong, I may have been mistaken about what's under the huge flannel shirts I see on people at the market. I thought those were happy tummies.

Edited by Madelaine McMasters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

If I'm wrong, I may have been mistaken about what's under the huge flannel shirts I see on people at the market. I thought those were happy tummies.

If your Market is like our Walmart..dunno about happy. Tummies, yes.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LexxiXhan said:

Flippin' 'eck - has anyone here ever experienced/ considered what it's like to be a PoC listening to white people define what it's like to be a PoC, or a woman listening to men 'splain what it means to be a woman or a feminist, or a gay or lesbian person have their sexuality and personality described from a heteronormative point of view??

There've been some fabulous nuggets of information-sharing from people who actually live the experiences they describe, and it's been reassuring to see some genuine allies speak up in their defence. Much of the rest has been an absolute *****show of privileged folk exposing themselves as ignorant, insensitive and self-normative, talking and punching down more marginalised people lest their delicate self-assurance and sense of superiority be challenged in any way.

Don't bother being an entitled feckwit and expect me to 'debate' my actual fecking life with you. We see this crap over and over again, both for trans folks and every other marginalised group out there. And don't pull any of that 'politics of respectability' crap either (google it, if you're ignorant) - marginalised people have every right to be pissed off with relentless normativity and getting questioned and 'splained to hell and back by people who're too lazy and half-arsed in their allyship to pull up their big pants and go learn stuff and actually give a *****.

If hearing a marginalised person say what they actually think is too much for you, effing jog on and keep on sucking trump's arse.

Actually, as a woman I have no issue with listening to my husband's interpretations of me. I find it enlightening. We are also of different ethnic backgrounds, and we talk about that too. We're still best of friends after 25 years so we must be doing something right!  Listening goes both ways. Other people may see something about you that you can't see. 

I sympathise with your frustrations. Your post however seems to be labeling large groups of people with ill-intent which, unless you have a window into their souls, you can't possibly know. Imagine if we could really talk and listen to our 'enemies'.. what might we find there? 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LexxiXhan said:

Flippin' 'eck -.......................arse.

it's this that makes me blegghhhh this discussions, if you don't agree to the aggressive forced opinion for totally accepting what is said, you'r put aside as some presidents behind part.

But good to see what political spectum is put aside here, typical that has to be put as stamp on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, about a day later and a few more pages have been added. Pages that contain potentially useful information, yes nut also pages wherein some have apparently decided that being aggressive or citing opinion pieces/news articles as though they were presenting research papers is just perfectly fine.

I have said all I intend to say thus far and barring direct responses or questions am rather unlikely to post further past this very entry.

Suffice to say that if you're ascribing motives/thoughts/feelings to what a user has posted, despite their using language which should make it very clear that such is not their intent .... You are not responding to what they posted, you are responding to your interpretation of what they posted.

There are some topics and discussions that should be done in a clinical, detached manner - present your information and viewpoint along with any personal/anecdotal information that pertains, even in a minimal way, to the topic and wait for the other party to process the information. Hopefully their response will be done in the same clinical and detached manner. If it is not, answer what you can and move on.

Emotionally laden responses help no one and only serve to push others away or to frustrate those who truly wish to understand.

I will end this with a comment on a particular line of questioning which I personally found to be very disturbing: Disorders.

I have my own issues - some I have gone into on this forum, some elsewhere and some I choose not to discuss - which when put together cause me to shudder at the thought that there are those who cannot understand why some disorders require "normative" treatment where others simply do not. I also shudder at the entire Neurodiversity movement - there are some neurological issues that should simply not be treated as anything other than a disorder/deviation.

Work to understand them. Work to see that people are not afraid. Do not work to have them accepted as normal.

This is coming from someone that has a portion of their mindscape devoted to the equivalent of a Marvel universe SHIELD Containment Pod - one that has seen far better days.

Do with that information, what you will and have a pleasant Samhain this evening.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Well now, about a day later and a few more pages have been added. Pages that contain potentially useful information, yes nut also pages wherein some have apparently decided that being aggressive or citing opinion pieces/news articles as though they were presenting research papers is just perfectly fine.

I have said all I intend to say thus far and barring direct responses or questions am rather unlikely to post further past this very entry.

Suffice to say that if you're ascribing motives/thoughts/feelings to what a user has posted, despite their using language which should make it very clear that such is not their intent .... You are not responding to what they posted, you are responding to your interpretation of what they posted.

There are some topics and discussions that should be done in a clinical, detached manner - present your information and viewpoint along with any personal/anecdotal information that pertains, even in a minimal way, to the topic and wait for the other party to process the information. Hopefully their response will be done in the same clinical and detached manner. If it is not, answer what you can and move on.

Emotionally laden responses help no one and only serve to push others away or to frustrate those who truly wish to understand.

I will end this with a comment on a particular line of questioning which I personally found to be very disturbing: Disorders.

I have my own issues - some I have gone into on this forum, some elsewhere and some I choose not to discuss - which when put together cause me to shudder at the thought that there are those who cannot understand why some disorders require "normative" treatment where others simply do not. I also shudder at the entire Neurodiversity movement - there are some neurological issues that should simply not be treated as anything other than a disorder/deviation.

Work to understand them. Work to see that people are not afraid. Do not work to have them accepted as normal.

This is coming from someone that has a portion of their mindscape devoted to the equivalent of a Marvel universe SHIELD Containment Pod - one that has seen far better days.

Do with that information, what you will and have a pleasant Samhain this evening.

Do you have more questions?

Yes, body dysmorphia disorder was mentioned several times in the thread. It is implied, but not a given, that Trans people have that disorder. Several Trans wrote that they are “happy with their bodies”; perhaps they do not have that disorder - yet are still Trans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am rather well aware of that particular disorder, Love and that was not what caused my mind to recoil concerning normalization.

The bulk of my questions were answered - here and elsewhere - well before I even thought of asking them.

Edited by Solar Legion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I missed any discussion of normalization except two places: homosexuality is no longer a disorder (“normalized”), and someone wrote of links between Trans and Aspberger’s (balderdash).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Okay, I missed any discussion of normalization except two places: homosexuality is no longer a disorder (“normalized”), and someone wrote of links between Trans and Aspberger’s (balderdash).

Look for posts containing the term Neurodiversity.

The term was born of noble intent and is still used for that intent - concerning Autism and similar - but has more and more been used as an umbrella term for most neural divergences. A rather dangerous road to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

present your information and viewpoint along with any personal/anecdotal information that pertains, even in a minimal way, to the topic and wait for the other party to process the information.

This ^^

If you actually want to help someone understand a different point of view and see things in a new way, don't make them a target for your pain. It's not fair to them and it just upsets everyone.

And for goodness sake, don't expect it to happen immediately. The timeframe from people asking questions to being attacked because they're still working through it all has been hours.

It's not their fault other people have hurt you.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Solar Legion said:

I am rather well aware of that particular disorder, Love and that was not what caused my mind to recoil concerning normalization.

You're probably going to have to name the obvious example, or you'll get well-meaning complaints about what you've said.

I can do it for you, if you'd prefer to avoid the uncomfortable topic.

Edited by AyelaNewLife
It made more sense in my head...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Okay, I missed any discussion of normalization except two places: homosexuality is no longer a disorder (“normalized”), and someone wrote of links between Trans and Aspberger’s (balderdash).

That was me, and I actually did research on that, and to top it off. My Endocrinologist, the person who is helping me with my transition, also said the same thing.  And yes, there is Correlation there. I am talking about the link between Aspergers and Gender Dysphoria.

Edited by halebore Aeon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, halebore Aeon said:

I am talking about the link between Aspergers and Gender Dysphoria.

Interestingly, of the 40-50 RL Trans people I know personally, 2 have either Aspberger’s or a form of Autism. I knew one before they figured out they were Trans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Interestingly, of the 40-50 RL Trans people I know personally, 2 have either Aspberger’s or a form of Autism. I knew one before they figured out they were Trans.

I have read a few medical journals, about this. It's actually quite fascinating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, halebore Aeon said:

I have read a few medical journals, about this. It's actually quite fascinating. 

The Trans cartoon I referenced in an earlier post (which someone else did not like at all) had a cartoon post recently which asked the question: “Why are Trans and (Autism/Asperger’s) lumped together?” Their answer, “Because they both DGAF.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

The Trans cartoon I referenced in an earlier post (which someone else did not like at all) had a cartoon post recently which asked the question: “Why are Trans and (Autism/Asperger’s) lumped together?” Their answer, “Because they both DGAF.”

I really don't mind it myself, as it doesn't bug me. I have Aspergers and Gender Dysphoria, and I can definitely tell you, that I can definitely see correlations there.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are you saying, Love? (drinking more coffee to hopefully wake up). That you see Trans people as a natural variant of the human condition and don't like them lumped together with what is viewed as a mental abnormality or illness (Asperger's)?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What?

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

So what are you saying, Love? (drinking more coffee to hopefully wake up). That you see Trans people as a natural variant of the human condition and don't like them lumped together with what is viewed as a mental abnormality or illness (Asperger's)?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Fionalein said:
19 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Can you tell me what, in the OP's opening paragraph, is aggressive?

How about this? Choice of language is a matter of aggression level. You can alleviate ignorance, but you can also choose to "fight", "combat" or "oppose" it. SJWs always draw quick inspiration from Orwell's newspeak dystopia

Fio, the OP is not a Social Justice Warrior. He was not engaging in disingenuous arguments. You're using a pejorative term  of the far-right to diminish those who genuninely believe in equal rights for all. An activist is attempting to facilitate equality through civil action or with support for those suffering from oppression (as the OP wants to do with the group he's proposing).

Definition of Social Justice Warrior:

"Social justice warrior (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism,[1][2] as well as identity politics.[3] The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction,[4] and engaging in disingenuous arguments.[5]

The phrase originated in the late 20th century as a neutral or positive term for people engaged in social justice activism.[1] In 2011, when the term first appeared on Twitter, it changed from a primarily positive term to an overwhelmingly negative one.[1] During the Gamergate controversy, the negative connotation gained increased use, and was particularly aimed at those espousing views adhering to social liberalism, cultural inclusivity, or feminism, as well as views deemed to be politically correct.[1][2]"

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Fionalein said:

Does it matter? Or has the US degraded enough into a developing country again that the business of avenging is once more considered good social citicenship? ... Read those comic books again, Luna. Vigilantes are criminals themselves, even US comic publishers stopped painting them shining white long ago.

I'm out of here, sadly the thread has proven to moe once more activists do not deserve my help, come back to me in 15 years when the movement grew up from infancy.

Groups who have felt oppressed in society often take on mascots that denote power, as they have felt so disempowered. It is not aggressive to take on a mascot that signifies battling oppressive forces in society -- they are simply trying to feel strong and 'right the wrongs' if u will. You're making too much of his using the term Transgender Avenger.


But yes, they do need to fight and oppose those who seek to relegate them to 2nd class status, as there are sick people in society who would just as soon see them heaped into a trash pile. Not far from where I live a transgendered man was stabbed to death, and a little further away a gay boy was beat to death.
To deal with this, yes they need to be strong.
It actually is a battle here in the U.S., and they do need to fight. Alongside  women who will soon see their rights to abortion taken away, and gays who will have less rights as Trump's policies go into effect. Not to mention the poor and the disabled (take a look at the Trump proposed budget and all the hard-won social rights he's trying to take away from U.S. citizens). The U.S. is a sad place right now.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

Groups who have felt oppressed in society often take on mascots that denote power, as they have felt so disempowered. It is not aggressive to take on a mascot that signifies battling oppressive forces in society -- they are simply trying to feel strong and 'right the wrongs' if u will. You're making too much of his using the term Transgender Avenger.


But yes, they do need to fight and oppose those who seek to relegate them to 2nd class status, as there are sick people in society who would just as soon see them heaped into a trash pile. Not far from where I live a transgendered man was stabbed to death, and a little further away a gay boy was beat to death.
To deal with this, yes they need to be strong.
It actually is a battle here in the U.S., and they do need to fight. Alongside  women who will soon see their rights to abortion taken away, and gays who will have less rights as Trump's policies go into effect. Not to mention the poor and the disabled (take a look at the Trump proposed budget and all the hard-won social rights he's trying to take away from U.S. citizens). The U.S. is a sad place right now.

If I may, I see both sides doing it. One side, demonizing Straight white and males, and then the other side doing the same thing. It's kind of a two-sided thing, here. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, halebore Aeon said:

If I may, I see both sides doing it. One side, demonizing Straight white and males, and then the other side doing the same thing. It's kind of a two-sided thing, here. 

The wealthy straight white males have been the default in the U.S. since its inception, and now they are seeing the loss of their status as other marginalized groups in society gain power. Power does not give up its power easily. Hence, they create a lot of the conflict we see in recent years -- a kind of divide and conquer strategy. And its working unfortunately -- they get us to battle each other while they run off with all the money and maintain their power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Luna Bliss said:

The wealthy straight white males have been the default in the U.S. since its inception, and now they are seeing the loss of their status as other marginalized groups in society gain power. Power does not give up its power easily. Hence, they create a lot of the conflict we see in recent years -- a kind of divide and conquer strategy. And its working unfortunately -- they get us to battle each other while they run off with all the money and maintain their power.

But if you want equality, and you want racism to go away, you can't go and be racist to wealthy straight white males, you shouldn't even be racist at all. Like by definition, that is being racist, and sexist. That is why I have no political affiliation, I find this whole battle to be BS. I cannot stand this, one side being this way, and the other side thinking, it's okay, cause they are fighting for an altruistic cause. If you want to fight for an altruistic cause, you need to practice what you preach, and stop doing that. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, halebore Aeon said:
3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

The wealthy straight white males have been the default in the U.S. since its inception, and now they are seeing the loss of their status as other marginalized groups in society gain power. Power does not give up its power easily. Hence, they create a lot of the conflict we see in recent years -- a kind of divide and conquer strategy. And its working unfortunately -- they get us to battle each other while they run off with all the money and maintain their power.

But if you want equality, and you want racism to go away, you can't go and be racist to wealthy straight white males, you shouldn't even be racist at all. Like by definition, that is being racist, and sexist. That is why I have no political affiliation, I find this whole battle to be BS. I cannot stand this, one side being this way, and the other side thinking, it's okay, cause they are fighting for an altruistic cause. If you want to fight for an altruistic cause, you need to practice what you preach, and stop doing that. 

I agree, you can't create change by combating racism with racism. And I have no doubt there are disturbed individuals who don't get this and heap unjustified anger onto straight, white, males. I don't think the majority of marginalized groups are doing this though, and I think those in power want to portray the marginalized groups as being an angry, racist mob. In other words, those in power are creating much of this -- they encourage the polarization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...