5 ms·

I have been part of a dance/art community in a past life. There's a prevailing belief that "the personal is political"[0], which basically manifests as all thin

by daenz 4y ago

I have been part of a dance/art community in a past life. There's a prevailing belief that "the personal is political"[0], which basically manifests as all things (art/products/etc) being unambiguously imbued with your politics, because politics doesn't end at the public sphere. This idea became mainstream at some point, and the result is that we must now signal what team we're on in everything we create. Abstaining from this signaling just means you're either ignorant of the causes (best assumption) or you're on the other team (worst assumption). 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_personal_is_political https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_personal_is_political

snowwrestler 4y ago
Politicizing the person is something that happens to some people against their will. For example people don’t choose to be gay, it just happens like being tall or having blue eyes. But in Florida there is a law now saying teachers can’t talk about gay people in school. Totally still fine to talk about tall people, though. This is why “Pride Month” is a big deal but tall people month is not. Gay people didn’t choose to become “political.” But since they are subjected to that scrutiny, they of course want to stand up for themselves, and other people who value equality under the law want to stand up with them.
- xisukar 4y ago
  >But in Florida there is a law now saying teachers can’t talk about gay people in school. If only you weren't misrepresenting the Parental Rights in Education bill[1] you'd have a point. There's no reason why a teacher needs to discuss sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. with kindergartens, be that heterosexual or homosexual. That's a private matter that has no place in a classroom, less so in primary grade levels. [1]: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1834 https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1834
  - Jcowell 4y ago
    > That's a private matter that has no place in a classroom While I agree that kindergartners may be too young to receive sexual education, I disagree that sex, sexual orientation , gender identities have no a place in the classroom. At least starting in Middle School it’s important to educate children on the realities of the world they are going to see that will include all of these things. I can at least point to Health and History as two subjects that these topics will be relevant in.
  - snowwrestler 4y ago
    Hi, you’re just incorrect here. Sexual orientation and gender are perfectly appropriate subjects for young children, and have been part of elementary curricula across the nation for decades. This is one reason why the Florida bill was opposed by pediatricians, child psychologists, and teachers. The professionals whose job it is know how children develop are aligned against the bill because it goes against quite a lot of research about to help children develop emotionally. Orientation and gender are attributes that children naturally observe in others and in themselves, even at a young age, and ask their teachers about. Denying them answers helps them not at all, but is useful for stigmatizing the subjects (which is of course the point of the bill). I noticed you also mentioned “sex” as well, but that is a red herring because no school system in Florida, or anywhere in the U.S. actually, starts sex education before middle school.
  - mikkergp 4y ago
    I wonder if there are actually any classrooms in America where gender identity or sexual orientation aren't discussed. Particularly in grade school. Particularly in a place like Florida. Edit: actually if you’re up for a serious discussion, you mention gender identity shouldn’t be a topic in primary school. Sometimes I wonder if we have a shared meaning on the terms “gender identity” because I would love to send my kid to a primary school where gender identity isn’t discussed, but the idea is ludicrous, not because of its immorality, but it’s impossibility. gender is one of the most discriminating social institutions we have. Everything about the way our society is organized is designed to socialize Kids into a traditional gender identity, hell months before being born parents throw gender reveal parties to determine if a kid should like pink or blue, so what would this even look like? Same thing with sexual orientation by the way given the prevalence of prince winning over princess stories in childrens media.
  - sn9 4y ago
    Teachers talk to kids about families all the time to illustrate ideas or just to build relationships. What happens when a student has two dads or two moms? Homosexuality isn't some abstract idea. Gays have kids and nephews and nieces. The same goes for all those other topics. There are developmentally appropriate ways of talking about most of them.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > There's no reason why a teacher needs to discuss sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. with kindergartens, be that heterosexual or homosexual. How do you explain the use of English personal pronouns without referencing sex or gender identity? I mean, I know the that the right is perfomatively “anti-pronoun”, but unless they've decided to exclude them entirely from education... The same issue exists with traditional honorifics (Mr./Mrs./Miss/etc.); with those you can probably get away with “it was what it is” for specific individuals as a baseline, but are teachers really expect to defer questions about them till later grades? (It's also very hard to to discuss anything about families, actual or fictional, without, in fact, talking about sexual orientation, and while the bill is superficially written neutrally, it's very clear that the intent is to resolve all these issues of perfectly common childhood things that would become impossible to discuss if it were enforced as written by simply by ignoring then as long as the orientations and identities at issue are heterosexual and cisgender.)
- Banana699 4y ago
  Is there no limit to the amount of "Standing up" or rules about when and with whom you do it? Because it seems to me that if some people reject your existence, and in response you politicise your whole existence and become an insufferable walking-talking political billboard constantly shouting the same things regardless of context or consent of the people you're shouting at, seems to me like that's walking right into their trap? I can say, speaking from experience, that insufferable political advertising has the effect of making people who had no objection to your existence previously gradually start despising you. Isn't the best revenge, as always, to live well and normal? Maybe save your moral grandstanding to the next one who says your existence is a sin, and not the user who wants to get shit done?
  - Kye 4y ago
    You have events mixed up. People act in the way you object to because others have politicized their existence. Refusing to be quiet about who they are is a response to people trying to erase them, both culturally and violently. That's what Pride is about. The first one was a riot kicked off by cops invading a space that was exactly as quiet as you would have preferred. It didn't work. The police came and attacked them anyway. Now we march and get in your face so you'll notice when someone tries to get rid of us.
    - Banana699 4y ago
      >People act in the way you object to because others have politicized their existence I didn't mix up the order of the two : >>some people reject your existence, and in response you politicise your whole existence is saying the same thing as >Refusing to be quiet about who they are is a response to people trying to erase them, both culturally and violently. >The first one was a riot kicked off by cops invading a space that was exactly as quiet as you would have preferred. Now we march and get in your face so you'll notice when someone tries to get rid of us. So you mean to say that the identity obsession lgbt people seem to have is just a bizarre distress mechanism so that people constantly notice them and come to their help if somebody tries to be violent with them ? Can this possibly backfire when your presence become so invasive and annoying that you flip me from the [not caring whether you exist or not] state to the [actively wishing you don't exist] state ? Can you not see how a lot of people in the second state would bring about the very outcome you fear ? Does your culture tell the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf ?

by daenz 4y ago

snowwrestler 4y ago

Politicizing the person is something that happens to some people against their will. For example people don’t choose to be gay, it just happens like being tall or having blue eyes. But in Florida there is a law now saying teachers can’t talk about gay people in school. Totally still fine to talk about tall people, though. This is why “Pride Month” is a big deal but tall people month is not. Gay people didn’t choose to become “political.” But since they are subjected to that scrutiny, they of course want to stand up for themselves, and other people who value equality under the law want to stand up with them.

xisukar 4y ago
>But in Florida there is a law now saying teachers can’t talk about gay people in school. If only you weren't misrepresenting the Parental Rights in Education bill[1] you'd have a point. There's no reason why a teacher needs to discuss sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. with kindergartens, be that heterosexual or homosexual. That's a private matter that has no place in a classroom, less so in primary grade levels. [1]: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1834 https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1834
- Jcowell 4y ago
  > That's a private matter that has no place in a classroom While I agree that kindergartners may be too young to receive sexual education, I disagree that sex, sexual orientation , gender identities have no a place in the classroom. At least starting in Middle School it’s important to educate children on the realities of the world they are going to see that will include all of these things. I can at least point to Health and History as two subjects that these topics will be relevant in.
- snowwrestler 4y ago
  Hi, you’re just incorrect here. Sexual orientation and gender are perfectly appropriate subjects for young children, and have been part of elementary curricula across the nation for decades. This is one reason why the Florida bill was opposed by pediatricians, child psychologists, and teachers. The professionals whose job it is know how children develop are aligned against the bill because it goes against quite a lot of research about to help children develop emotionally. Orientation and gender are attributes that children naturally observe in others and in themselves, even at a young age, and ask their teachers about. Denying them answers helps them not at all, but is useful for stigmatizing the subjects (which is of course the point of the bill). I noticed you also mentioned “sex” as well, but that is a red herring because no school system in Florida, or anywhere in the U.S. actually, starts sex education before middle school.
- mikkergp 4y ago
  I wonder if there are actually any classrooms in America where gender identity or sexual orientation aren't discussed. Particularly in grade school. Particularly in a place like Florida. Edit: actually if you’re up for a serious discussion, you mention gender identity shouldn’t be a topic in primary school. Sometimes I wonder if we have a shared meaning on the terms “gender identity” because I would love to send my kid to a primary school where gender identity isn’t discussed, but the idea is ludicrous, not because of its immorality, but it’s impossibility. gender is one of the most discriminating social institutions we have. Everything about the way our society is organized is designed to socialize Kids into a traditional gender identity, hell months before being born parents throw gender reveal parties to determine if a kid should like pink or blue, so what would this even look like? Same thing with sexual orientation by the way given the prevalence of prince winning over princess stories in childrens media.
- sn9 4y ago
  Teachers talk to kids about families all the time to illustrate ideas or just to build relationships. What happens when a student has two dads or two moms? Homosexuality isn't some abstract idea. Gays have kids and nephews and nieces. The same goes for all those other topics. There are developmentally appropriate ways of talking about most of them.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > There's no reason why a teacher needs to discuss sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. with kindergartens, be that heterosexual or homosexual. How do you explain the use of English personal pronouns without referencing sex or gender identity? I mean, I know the that the right is perfomatively “anti-pronoun”, but unless they've decided to exclude them entirely from education... The same issue exists with traditional honorifics (Mr./Mrs./Miss/etc.); with those you can probably get away with “it was what it is” for specific individuals as a baseline, but are teachers really expect to defer questions about them till later grades? (It's also very hard to to discuss anything about families, actual or fictional, without, in fact, talking about sexual orientation, and while the bill is superficially written neutrally, it's very clear that the intent is to resolve all these issues of perfectly common childhood things that would become impossible to discuss if it were enforced as written by simply by ignoring then as long as the orientations and identities at issue are heterosexual and cisgender.)
Banana699 4y ago
Is there no limit to the amount of "Standing up" or rules about when and with whom you do it? Because it seems to me that if some people reject your existence, and in response you politicise your whole existence and become an insufferable walking-talking political billboard constantly shouting the same things regardless of context or consent of the people you're shouting at, seems to me like that's walking right into their trap? I can say, speaking from experience, that insufferable political advertising has the effect of making people who had no objection to your existence previously gradually start despising you. Isn't the best revenge, as always, to live well and normal? Maybe save your moral grandstanding to the next one who says your existence is a sin, and not the user who wants to get shit done?
- Kye 4y ago
  You have events mixed up. People act in the way you object to because others have politicized their existence. Refusing to be quiet about who they are is a response to people trying to erase them, both culturally and violently. That's what Pride is about. The first one was a riot kicked off by cops invading a space that was exactly as quiet as you would have preferred. It didn't work. The police came and attacked them anyway. Now we march and get in your face so you'll notice when someone tries to get rid of us.
  - Banana699 4y ago
    >People act in the way you object to because others have politicized their existence I didn't mix up the order of the two : >>some people reject your existence, and in response you politicise your whole existence is saying the same thing as >Refusing to be quiet about who they are is a response to people trying to erase them, both culturally and violently. >The first one was a riot kicked off by cops invading a space that was exactly as quiet as you would have preferred. Now we march and get in your face so you'll notice when someone tries to get rid of us. So you mean to say that the identity obsession lgbt people seem to have is just a bizarre distress mechanism so that people constantly notice them and come to their help if somebody tries to be violent with them ? Can this possibly backfire when your presence become so invasive and annoying that you flip me from the [not caring whether you exist or not] state to the [actively wishing you don't exist] state ? Can you not see how a lot of people in the second state would bring about the very outcome you fear ? Does your culture tell the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf ?