5 ms·

"Separating yourself from people with differing views doesn't do either side good. It actively works to reinforce an "Us vs Them" mentality. Instead of speaking

"Separating yourself from people with differing views doesn't do either side good. It actively works to reinforce an "Us vs Them" mentality. Instead of speaking to each other, you speak past one another. Two groups unable to communicate with words tend to eventually resort to weapons to "get the other side to understand"." Kinda hard to listen to someone who thinks me being transgender makes me subhuman or mentally incompetent. It's a basic standard that you have to see the other person as a person first before any meaningful exchange is possible. And to assert it is my moral duty to make them understand is nonsensical. "aken to extreme, as many people seem to do on social media, filters your social bubble to only "Other Yous". I feel doing that actively harmful to one's self. Stifling their own view of the world and limiting it only to the parts they agree with." I've ranged the political spectrum more than most. From nationalism (with some racialist notions) to currently a Mutualist. I seriously doubt there's anything I can learn from the likes of Ben Shapiro when it comes to conservatism. Those folks are light weights compared to George Will and the late William F Buckley Jr. If I want to refresh my memory on conservative ideology I got dozens of essays by more competent people from years past to read. I don't need to listen someone spew an Obama birther theory to expand my horizons. "The line between "Those people are violent and dangerous and I wouldn't save their lives if I could" to "Those people should be rounded up and killed for the benefit of everyone else" has been historically thin and often crossed. If they're such bad people, does the world really need them? It's an easy and rational conclusion to make if you truly believe it." Yeah cause me not listening to a bigoted relative tell me that water fluoridation turned me a "tranny queer" is going to lead to people putting them in a concentration camp. In all seriousness, your logic is very tenuous as there's no evidence of a massive liberal or progressive wave of hate coming. I don't know of any mainstream liberal or even a decently read anarchist advocating for the extermination of social conservatives. Rather I read every day CNS or Free Republic or Townhall how being a "transgendered" is "dangerous and delusional." So frankly, I'm not gonna be friends with such people. Would you?

Nadya 10y ago
>Kinda hard to listen to someone who thinks me being transgender makes me subhuman or mentally incompetent. It's a basic standard that you have to see the other person as a person first before any meaningful exchange is possible. And to assert it is my moral duty to make them understand is nonsensical. It is extremely difficult to treat people as people when they refuse you the same respect. The answer isn't to step down to their level though. It may be "childish" or "naive" advice but it is a virtue I hold myself to all the same. >I've ranged the political spectrum more than most. From nationalism (with some racialist notions) to currently a Mutualist. I seriously doubt there's anything I can learn from the likes of Ben Shapiro when it comes to conservatism. Those folks are light weights compared to George Will and the late William F Buckley Jr. If I want to refresh my memory on conservative ideology I got dozens of essays by more competent people from years past to read. I don't need to listen someone spew an Obama birther theory to expand my horizons. The social-bubble comment was speaking in general, not necessarily of you. I apologize if I failed to make that clear enough. Choosing who one associates with is fine. Choosing what they prefer to hear or listen to is fine in moderation. I believe there is such a thing as "too much filtering" and anyone regardless of their political leanings is at risk of sealing themselves off in an echo chamber. A few days on Twitter is enough to see many, many echo chambers shouting past their opposites and "circlejerking" their own ideologies. Both sides only increasing the divide between themselves. >In all seriousness, your logic is very tenuous as there's no evidence of a massive liberal or progressive wave of hate coming. I don't know of any mainstream liberal or even a decently read anarchist advocating for the extermination of social conservatives. We must be in two very, very different social bubbles. Thankfully more property has been damaged than people killed at this point - but I'm not looking forward to what the next decade brings. The past twelve years has seen a drastic and increasingly large ideological gap between people. With the widening gap - and escalation of threats and "acceptable behavior" has risen, progressively worsening each year. One side championing various forms and various levels of "social justice", some more agreeable than others, and the "racist/sexist/___ist bigots" who disagree, even if only in extremity. One of these two sides receives a disproportionate amount of mob justice, internet/social-media brigades, and dehumanization for "having the wrong beliefs". The bullying behavior is excused with reasons such as "They deserve it for their bigoted beliefs!" or "They're racists/sexists/misogynists!". I've noticed the accusations only sometimes match up with reality and slowly increasing number have been proven to have been fabricated entirely. Either for attention or an excuse to act out - I'm not sure which but I do hold a bias in one direction. Now pardon me, I went off on a tangent below. I left it however, as I feel it may provide some insight into why I believe what I believe. Seeing as you twice mentioned transgenderism, surely you have heard of Paul R. McHugh? Based only on what you've said in your post, I would assume your thoughts on him are negative: He's a bigot, a "tranny hater", lacks any credibility, that sort of stuff. Now here is one of the largest reasons I've come to hold the beliefs I hold: I've received death threats for the cardinal sin of giving even the smallest amount of thought towards the idea that he might be right. For most transexuals, I've now been placed in the "asshole bucket" so to speak. The fact I identify as the opposite gender doesn't matter. I'm a self-hater, an "enemy", brainwashed, "not a real transexual", a bigot myself! You name it, I've been called it by this point. I don't see these people as being any different than the bigots we have both dealt with. I'm able to see where they stand. They refuse to see where I stand. It isn't even an inability to see things my way - but a complete and utter refusal. I do not see that as being good.
- norea-armozel 10y ago
  "It is extremely difficult to treat people as people when they refuse you the same respect. The answer isn't to step down to their level though. It may be "childish" or "naive" advice but it is a virtue I hold myself to all the same." Again, is it my moral duty to be a nice person to what amounts to as jerks? This seems to be something you can't provide so how about you admit I have no such duty to be nice to said jerks. Because that's really what it boils down to which seems to me that people want to put up fake politeness when in practice all that does is stress out the jerk in question and the person trying to be nice to said jerk. "Choosing what they prefer to hear or listen to is fine in moderation. believe there is such a thing as "too much filtering" and anyone regardless of their political leanings is at risk of sealing themselves off in an echo chamber." No it's called my moral right of free association. I'm not going to listen to a David Duke or a Paul McHugh ever. As in never. And there's no reason to moderate that practice. I don't listen to Neo Nazis. I don't listen to alt-medicine crackpots. I don't listen to Flat Earthers. So, there's no need to moderate this when the other side of the argument is categorical wrong. You don't debate someone who screams that 2 plus 2 equals 5.1. You just shake your head and move on. Such people have nothing to contribute in terms of my knowledge base and to entertain them is to waste your time and theirs. "Thankfully more property has been damaged than people killed at this point - but I'm not looking forward to what the next decade brings." Tweets and facebook memes don't constitute assault nor vandalism. And you have a higher chance today from dying a car wreck of your own making than from a random act of terrorism. "The past twelve years has seen a drastic and increasingly large ideological gap between people. With the widening gap - and escalation of threats and "acceptable behavior" has risen, progressively worsening each year." Yeah that gap is widening because certain people (aka social conservatives) don't want to move on. Specifically, the social conservatives in question demand LGBT people like myself to be in the closet or forced into mental wards where I'm to be subjected to "reparative therapies (usually includes things like ECT aka electro-shock therapy)." So, I'm sorry if I'm not going to listen to or be polite to such people. Either they need to acknowledge my civil rights or don't bother interacting with me at all. I don't think what I state is extreme, it's quite moderate in terms of global political movements. Even conservatives in other countries agree with my position, so basically there's no excuse at this point for the US social conservatives to keep fighting these issues. "Seeing as you twice mentioned transgenderism, surely you have heard of Paul R. McHugh? Based only on what you've said in your post, I would assume your thoughts on him are negative: He's a bigot, a "tranny hater", lacks any credibility, that sort of stuff." Yes and he's a complete dirtbag when it comes to defending Cardinal Law from the investigation on the molestation accusations. Dude went as far as to claim the victims were deluded or mentally incompetent. So no, I don't listen to dirtbag rent-o-shrinks that have no moral spine to stand up to his own church when it has corrupt cardinals and other staff protecting molesters. "Now here is one of the largest reasons I've come to hold the beliefs I hold: I've received death threats for the cardinal sin of giving even the smallest amount of thought towards the idea that he might be right." Well I don't think you deserve threats but you are a dirtbag by implication at worse or outright dumb at best. McHugh's thesis holds no water in light of the various studies so far. All you have to do is search for it on Google Scholar to see why. "I don't see these people as being any different than the bigots we have both dealt with. I'm able to see where they stand. They refuse to see where I stand. It isn't even an inability to see things my way - but a complete and utter refusal. I do not see that as being good." Sorry but McHugh is a dirtbag for so many reasons and no I won't ever entertain his positions. If this is too much for you it's best you stop replying to my comments or never engage me again. McHugh is basically the creationist of gender identity, so I don't listen to said crackpots. Deal with it.

Nadya 10y ago

>Kinda hard to listen to someone who thinks me being transgender makes me subhuman or mentally incompetent. It's a basic standard that you have to see the other person as a person first before any meaningful exchange is possible. And to assert it is my moral duty to make them understand is nonsensical. It is extremely difficult to treat people as people when they refuse you the same respect. The answer isn't to step down to their level though. It may be "childish" or "naive" advice but it is a virtue I hold myself to all the same. >I've ranged the political spectrum more than most. From nationalism (with some racialist notions) to currently a Mutualist. I seriously doubt there's anything I can learn from the likes of Ben Shapiro when it comes to conservatism. Those folks are light weights compared to George Will and the late William F Buckley Jr. If I want to refresh my memory on conservative ideology I got dozens of essays by more competent people from years past to read. I don't need to listen someone spew an Obama birther theory to expand my horizons. The social-bubble comment was speaking in general, not necessarily of you. I apologize if I failed to make that clear enough. Choosing who one associates with is fine. Choosing what they prefer to hear or listen to is fine in moderation. I believe there is such a thing as "too much filtering" and anyone regardless of their political leanings is at risk of sealing themselves off in an echo chamber. A few days on Twitter is enough to see many, many echo chambers shouting past their opposites and "circlejerking" their own ideologies. Both sides only increasing the divide between themselves. >In all seriousness, your logic is very tenuous as there's no evidence of a massive liberal or progressive wave of hate coming. I don't know of any mainstream liberal or even a decently read anarchist advocating for the extermination of social conservatives. We must be in two very, very different social bubbles. Thankfully more property has been damaged than people killed at this point - but I'm not looking forward to what the next decade brings. The past twelve years has seen a drastic and increasingly large ideological gap between people. With the widening gap - and escalation of threats and "acceptable behavior" has risen, progressively worsening each year. One side championing various forms and various levels of "social justice", some more agreeable than others, and the "racist/sexist/___ist bigots" who disagree, even if only in extremity. One of these two sides receives a disproportionate amount of mob justice, internet/social-media brigades, and dehumanization for "having the wrong beliefs". The bullying behavior is excused with reasons such as "They deserve it for their bigoted beliefs!" or "They're racists/sexists/misogynists!". I've noticed the accusations only sometimes match up with reality and slowly increasing number have been proven to have been fabricated entirely. Either for attention or an excuse to act out - I'm not sure which but I do hold a bias in one direction. Now pardon me, I went off on a tangent below. I left it however, as I feel it may provide some insight into why I believe what I believe. Seeing as you twice mentioned transgenderism, surely you have heard of Paul R. McHugh? Based only on what you've said in your post, I would assume your thoughts on him are negative: He's a bigot, a "tranny hater", lacks any credibility, that sort of stuff. Now here is one of the largest reasons I've come to hold the beliefs I hold: I've received death threats for the cardinal sin of giving even the smallest amount of thought towards the idea that he might be right. For most transexuals, I've now been placed in the "asshole bucket" so to speak. The fact I identify as the opposite gender doesn't matter. I'm a self-hater, an "enemy", brainwashed, "not a real transexual", a bigot myself! You name it, I've been called it by this point. I don't see these people as being any different than the bigots we have both dealt with. I'm able to see where they stand. They refuse to see where I stand. It isn't even an inability to see things my way - but a complete and utter refusal. I do not see that as being good.

norea-armozel 10y ago
"It is extremely difficult to treat people as people when they refuse you the same respect. The answer isn't to step down to their level though. It may be "childish" or "naive" advice but it is a virtue I hold myself to all the same." Again, is it my moral duty to be a nice person to what amounts to as jerks? This seems to be something you can't provide so how about you admit I have no such duty to be nice to said jerks. Because that's really what it boils down to which seems to me that people want to put up fake politeness when in practice all that does is stress out the jerk in question and the person trying to be nice to said jerk. "Choosing what they prefer to hear or listen to is fine in moderation. believe there is such a thing as "too much filtering" and anyone regardless of their political leanings is at risk of sealing themselves off in an echo chamber." No it's called my moral right of free association. I'm not going to listen to a David Duke or a Paul McHugh ever. As in never. And there's no reason to moderate that practice. I don't listen to Neo Nazis. I don't listen to alt-medicine crackpots. I don't listen to Flat Earthers. So, there's no need to moderate this when the other side of the argument is categorical wrong. You don't debate someone who screams that 2 plus 2 equals 5.1. You just shake your head and move on. Such people have nothing to contribute in terms of my knowledge base and to entertain them is to waste your time and theirs. "Thankfully more property has been damaged than people killed at this point - but I'm not looking forward to what the next decade brings." Tweets and facebook memes don't constitute assault nor vandalism. And you have a higher chance today from dying a car wreck of your own making than from a random act of terrorism. "The past twelve years has seen a drastic and increasingly large ideological gap between people. With the widening gap - and escalation of threats and "acceptable behavior" has risen, progressively worsening each year." Yeah that gap is widening because certain people (aka social conservatives) don't want to move on. Specifically, the social conservatives in question demand LGBT people like myself to be in the closet or forced into mental wards where I'm to be subjected to "reparative therapies (usually includes things like ECT aka electro-shock therapy)." So, I'm sorry if I'm not going to listen to or be polite to such people. Either they need to acknowledge my civil rights or don't bother interacting with me at all. I don't think what I state is extreme, it's quite moderate in terms of global political movements. Even conservatives in other countries agree with my position, so basically there's no excuse at this point for the US social conservatives to keep fighting these issues. "Seeing as you twice mentioned transgenderism, surely you have heard of Paul R. McHugh? Based only on what you've said in your post, I would assume your thoughts on him are negative: He's a bigot, a "tranny hater", lacks any credibility, that sort of stuff." Yes and he's a complete dirtbag when it comes to defending Cardinal Law from the investigation on the molestation accusations. Dude went as far as to claim the victims were deluded or mentally incompetent. So no, I don't listen to dirtbag rent-o-shrinks that have no moral spine to stand up to his own church when it has corrupt cardinals and other staff protecting molesters. "Now here is one of the largest reasons I've come to hold the beliefs I hold: I've received death threats for the cardinal sin of giving even the smallest amount of thought towards the idea that he might be right." Well I don't think you deserve threats but you are a dirtbag by implication at worse or outright dumb at best. McHugh's thesis holds no water in light of the various studies so far. All you have to do is search for it on Google Scholar to see why. "I don't see these people as being any different than the bigots we have both dealt with. I'm able to see where they stand. They refuse to see where I stand. It isn't even an inability to see things my way - but a complete and utter refusal. I do not see that as being good." Sorry but McHugh is a dirtbag for so many reasons and no I won't ever entertain his positions. If this is too much for you it's best you stop replying to my comments or never engage me again. McHugh is basically the creationist of gender identity, so I don't listen to said crackpots. Deal with it.