4 ms·

I think that's the issue though right? If we accept that it won't necessarily make sense or follow any logical consistent rules because its subjective, then how

by yucky 4y ago

I think that's the issue though right? If we accept that it won't necessarily make sense or follow any logical consistent rules because its subjective, then how exactly can we expect other to take it seriously? I'm not trying to be dismissive either, but my mind works logically. If I'm told "we're just making it up as we go and it's different for everyone" then you can't expect me to believe I need to actually take it seriously. It really does sound like people are just taking the concept of personality and tryin to overlay it on something where it doesn't fit, only leading to increased confusion. Ultimately, what is the point? What is the goal?

oneoff786 4y ago
I do think people that identify as incredibly niche sub types are doing something dumb. Similar to the vast majority of people that do this for other dimensions of their identity or attempt to do it for others’ identity. But believing this to be the case isn’t incompatible with respecting that they feel different from the “normal” archetype or just generally acknowledging their preferred identity as it’s the closest thing they’ve got to describe themselves. Most people aligned with a given label are pretty reasonable and won’t demand you do anything too out of your way. Yes there are many exceptions but such is the case for every dimension of identity. This one is just a dimension that many people are eager to assert doesn’t exist.; Sometimes asserting that if you can’t cleanly identify as something easily defined that you’re just making up your differences which is of course also incorrect reasoning. People suck at such types of thinking and most cultures encourage against it to empower in group unity.
- yucky 4y ago
  One could argue that it creates an incredible imposition on logically oriented individuals to tell them that they are bigots if they're not willing to play pretend.
  - oneoff786 4y ago
    No not really. You’re not being logical if you reject someone’s preferred identity on the pedantic assertion that it’s an approximation of their collective beliefs rather than a rigid classification; and conflate that pedantic assertion with some additional implication that their person beliefs about themselves are less valid. You’re not a bigot for doing this. You are being an asshole nonetheless. And you don’t come off as more intelligent, just more clueless; even if you are in fact more intelligent.
    - yucky 4y ago
      That's simply not true. If I see an apple and someone tells me I must refer to it as an orange because that is what they want to pretend it to be, then the best course of action is to either tell them that it is in fact an orange, or to just ignore them. It is never the right answer to encourage their incorrect demands. Would you also suggest we pretend the voices that a schizophrenic hears are actually there and real? If not, why not? It's real to them..
      - oneoff786 4y ago
        If you cannot understand the difference between physical sex and gender identity then you’re not capable of having this discussion. You’re not addressing the premise at hand. Not very logical fwiw
        fillippo 4y ago
        Well they're not saying anything incorrect there. The concept of gender identity was only invented to try to provide some cover explanation as to why some people want to be the opposite sex. It's a way of legitimizing the whole thing, so e.g. rather than men saying "I want to be a woman", they can lean on this idea of gender identity and say "I am a woman", where "woman" has been redefined as "anyone with a female gender identity". And per the definition of gender identity, a man can be said to have a "female gender identity" if he wants to be a woman. Naturally, this redefinition has turned out to be quite controversial.

by yucky 4y ago

oneoff786 4y ago

I do think people that identify as incredibly niche sub types are doing something dumb. Similar to the vast majority of people that do this for other dimensions of their identity or attempt to do it for others’ identity. But believing this to be the case isn’t incompatible with respecting that they feel different from the “normal” archetype or just generally acknowledging their preferred identity as it’s the closest thing they’ve got to describe themselves. Most people aligned with a given label are pretty reasonable and won’t demand you do anything too out of your way. Yes there are many exceptions but such is the case for every dimension of identity. This one is just a dimension that many people are eager to assert doesn’t exist.; Sometimes asserting that if you can’t cleanly identify as something easily defined that you’re just making up your differences which is of course also incorrect reasoning. People suck at such types of thinking and most cultures encourage against it to empower in group unity.

yucky 4y ago
One could argue that it creates an incredible imposition on logically oriented individuals to tell them that they are bigots if they're not willing to play pretend.
- oneoff786 4y ago
  No not really. You’re not being logical if you reject someone’s preferred identity on the pedantic assertion that it’s an approximation of their collective beliefs rather than a rigid classification; and conflate that pedantic assertion with some additional implication that their person beliefs about themselves are less valid. You’re not a bigot for doing this. You are being an asshole nonetheless. And you don’t come off as more intelligent, just more clueless; even if you are in fact more intelligent.
  - yucky 4y ago
    That's simply not true. If I see an apple and someone tells me I must refer to it as an orange because that is what they want to pretend it to be, then the best course of action is to either tell them that it is in fact an orange, or to just ignore them. It is never the right answer to encourage their incorrect demands. Would you also suggest we pretend the voices that a schizophrenic hears are actually there and real? If not, why not? It's real to them..
    - oneoff786 4y ago
      If you cannot understand the difference between physical sex and gender identity then you’re not capable of having this discussion. You’re not addressing the premise at hand. Not very logical fwiw
      - fillippo 4y ago
        Well they're not saying anything incorrect there. The concept of gender identity was only invented to try to provide some cover explanation as to why some people want to be the opposite sex. It's a way of legitimizing the whole thing, so e.g. rather than men saying "I want to be a woman", they can lean on this idea of gender identity and say "I am a woman", where "woman" has been redefined as "anyone with a female gender identity". And per the definition of gender identity, a man can be said to have a "female gender identity" if he wants to be a woman. Naturally, this redefinition has turned out to be quite controversial.