Welcome, Reddit ban wave refugees!

submitted by [deleted] from self.whatever

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Interesting. I edited my list comment to "feminism and LGB related." Would you say DropTheT has an ideological bent at all?

If you feel like answering, what would you consider to be feminist ideology, and what do you disagree with about it?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

A core component of feminist ideology, in the books I've read and of the popular speakers I've seen on twitter - and elsewhere - is the idea of equity. Equality in the traditional sense strives to mean everyone has an equal chance at something, whereas equity demands an equal outcome regardless between any arbitrary selection of people. I fundamentally do not agree with equity, see short stories like Harrison Bergeron, because no two people are truly born equal in any given thing. It contradicts science, as well, as cross-culturally on average men and women have slightly different personalities and interests. Not only do people differ, but genders will differ, and so far all I've seen are "feminists" decrying this as innate sexism. As if reality is sexist.

It is very frequently the case that feminists will, also, ignore the plights and inequalities men face as a nebulous other known as "patriarchy" instead of admitting systemic inequalities exist independently. They took a loose concept in early anthropology, one that is wholly inaccurate to describe cultures and blind to any nuance, and robbed it of context to broadly describe humanity as a whole. I can no more concede to "patriarchy" as valid than I will "equity" as the ultimate ideal of society. Instead, I subscribe to classical liberalism and utilitarianism. Everyone ought to be given as best as possible an equal chance at what they are best suited for, and as best as possible the utility of each person ought to be allowed to be gathered to the best of their ability or interest. Beyond that, for persons of little ability, they ought to be cared for by a society, for they would've hardly wished to be born in such a low condition of their own volition. This idea, to me, is about fairness. "Equity" isn't about fairness, it's about hobbling the best to make the worst feel better.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Interesting, thanks for explaining.

I guess it surprises me because I had thought LGB ideology operated in a similar way.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I don't think I am an ideologue. If I am I certainly have never found a "camp" to align with. I only explained why I don't think I agree with feminism, and that I do not think DropTheT is inherently feminist. Since the problem I have with T's is the demand they, the activists and prominent figures, and corporations, that you believe they are what they say they are. Rejecting the demand you believe what someone else does about themselves is hardly inherently feminist, nor needs to be.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I don't think I am an ideologue.

I guess for me it seems like there is a similar thing going on with LGB ideology. Would you consider it "homophobic" to say "I think homosexuality isn't a real thing, it's just a choice/behavior/interest like anything else humans do". I have found many people consider that to be a "bad" idea (because disputing it would create political difficulties for the LGB political movement, much the same reason Galileo was punished in his time for his truthseeking causing political difficulties for a different political group in his time.)

Would you consider that an idea that's perfectly fine to discuss and be curious about and explore, just like "why is the sky blue?" and any other idea?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I think anyone who argues human behavior is "a choice" in some meaningful fashion is already packaging in factually flawed notions of free will, as well as giving up the ground of their own sexuality. There's a reason everyone mocks those people, because if homosexuality is a choice they must concede heterosexuality is a choice, and if they don't resort to "muh bible" they've nothing to actually argue.

"Homophobic", though? I reserve that for people who actually do preserve and persist in contradictory hypocritical positions specially reserved for homosexuals. Like, you know, every trans person ever who argues not wanting to put your dick in a vagina is transphobic. Or the people who claim that "it's a choice" but then claim their own sexuality isn't a choice. It's a mindset, not an argument.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I guess to me things like "only the bible has arguments challenging these ideas" and "people who think very differently than I do about these topics are homophobic/bigots" seem more ideological and dogmatic.

At any rate, thanks for sharing your current thoughts about this. I'm not that familiar with LGBdroptheT so it's interesting to see what people have to say about it.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I've had countless arguments over countless hours with all sorts of people. If I am not allowed to summarize my experiences by accurately depicting the vast majority of them as "muh bible", which they generally are, what am I supposed to do? Write whole books and encyclopedias of transcripts? It isn't about "people who think differently", it's a special category of people I reserve as bigots who are explicitly hypocritical with respect to their treatment of others.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Do you not think you're being hypocritical if you use "homophobia" this way but don't want others to use "transphobia" (and perhaps "sexism" or "misogyny") this way?

Nobody else here mention the bible, or people who say that it's transphobic for self-identified homosexual men to not consider transgenderist women as sexual partners. It was you who introduced those topics. All I did was say that it looks to me like there is at least one dogmatic, ideological position within LGB-ism: it's bad and not ok to think "homosexuality is as much of a choice as most other human behavior." And I invited you to comment on that. To me, your response suggests to me that this is an ideology-based dogmatic stance for you.

I might be misunderstanding, if so you're welcome to clear it up. That's just how it looks to me. I had somewhat hoped that DropTheT might be a place where more open discussion could take place the way you were talking about it.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I do not understand your point at all anymore. It is precisely because sexuality is not something "chosen" that gender ideology is homophobic, since it seeks to supplant innate inclinations with an ideology of gender expression above all else. Just as the bible thumpers did with one era of their arguments against homosexuality. What do you think is hypocritical here?

To compare what is, reality, with dogma and ideology, is to supplant reality itself with mere opinion. The "choices" people make in the casual way people mean choice, such as whether to have a sandwich or make eggs, is not comparable nor even coherent to sexuality. That is a real, distinct, difference. How is that ideology?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Would you consider it "homophobic" to say "I think homosexuality isn't a real thing, it's just a choice/behavior/interest like anything else humans do"

I would yes. That's basically the basis for conversion therapy.

[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The fact it's a hate cult is something to have against it, that it's Marxist even more so, plus it's entirely fucking wrong about almost everything which is definitely a black mark, eh?