Jump to content



Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

@  Fire Blazer : (21 August 2017 - 01:18 AM) peekaboo
@  Cero : (20 August 2017 - 11:25 PM) rip
@  Fire Blazer : (14 August 2017 - 07:43 PM) oh... awk. XP
@  Idiot : (14 August 2017 - 01:08 PM) Aside from maybe a twitter, and a Skype I no longer have access to lol.
@  Idiot : (14 August 2017 - 01:08 PM) I don't actually have any public contact information, though. So that would explain why you don't have it.
@  Fire Blazer : (14 August 2017 - 05:08 AM) ahahaha. can't fault that logic.
@  kirant : (14 August 2017 - 01:41 AM) A quiet forum suits me better I think...so few hours in the day that I don't feel like sorting through all the activity on an active one for the nuggets of gold. Sturgeon's law and all.
@  kirant : (14 August 2017 - 01:40 AM) Ha. Someone assumes I leave forums. I think there's been 2 (?) that I've quit before their servers got shut down.
@  Fire Blazer : (13 August 2017 - 09:08 PM) hmmmm~
@  Fire Blazer : (13 August 2017 - 08:43 PM) i dunno, just thinking with these forums being kinda lifeless, i'll get sad thinking i have no way to talk to some people anymore. even if they are an idiot :P
@  Fire Blazer : (13 August 2017 - 08:42 PM) BBaller#1033
@  Fire Blazer : (13 August 2017 - 08:42 PM) if you have Discord you should at least add me there.
@  Fire Blazer : (13 August 2017 - 08:42 PM) now that I think about it, I don't have any of your contact info, Idiot.
@  Fire Blazer : (13 August 2017 - 08:41 PM) there's really no shortage of bad or concerning or upsetting news lately, so I can agree with that. though maybe it's a bit of an understatement... lol
@  Idiot : (12 August 2017 - 12:03 PM) I think meh is an accurate description of current times in general lol
@  zac : (12 August 2017 - 03:59 AM) it's been a very "meh" kinda time
@  zac : (12 August 2017 - 03:59 AM) nothing is going on right now, game releases i'm actually interested in have been slow
@  zac : (12 August 2017 - 03:59 AM) honestly i have wanted to post, but just haven't had anything to post about
@  kirant : (09 August 2017 - 03:50 AM) I'm starting to imagine it like a twice shy situation (or as Wikipedia tells me, mamihlapinatapai)...we're wanting to post but don't want to be the first one to post.
@  Fire Blazer : (09 August 2017 - 01:32 AM) *sees "45 users are online"*

even half of those were actual posting members... alas, lol. the glory days of FES have long since passed.

Photo

Why we cannot just put our differences aside


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 15 April 2017 - 09:39 AM

So there I was doing stupid things like reading feminism articles again and I was reminded of something. Recently, all these identity politics and stuff going around all over the place has kind of made me distracted from the idea, but someone complaining about hatred went and pointed it out once again, this idea of:

 

"Why can't we just put aside our (allegedly irrelevant or trivial) differences and get along?"

 

Now I have to point out that the person who said this is an asshole themselves who hates heteronormativity with a passion. He's also gay and is thus part of an oppressed group. What they are actually saying is something more like...

 

"Why can't everybody stop being so ignorant and prejudiced, and make sure everybody is accommodated for their individuality."

 

The context is for sexual preferences and gender, neither of which are supposed to be chosen and are instead intrinsic. People vouching for social justice basically see oppression in itself as being ridiculous (not because it doesn't happen but because the action itself seems to be nothing but harmful) and often react in terror or plunge at an opportunity for the spotlight of being someone in the right.

 

As of the current time, the fight is usually against heteronormativity, sexual restrictions, the most dominant racial group of the country, differences of the flesh, religion and violent measures in of themselves.

 

Let's say that I, Mercurius, as autocrat of an independent global superpower, successfully evolved and sustained a country where...

  1. Sexual activity is not considered to be a particularly notable or desirable.
  2. Women are relieved of biological disadvantages relating to childbirth due to technological advances that include causing periods to be rendered ineffectual and artificial means of conception.
  3. Concepts of masculinity and femininity are not established. Activities, clothes, tools, and even biological differences no longer have any association with being manly or girly.
  4. The national language has no gender distinctions and cultural norms encourage everyone to avoid focus on biologically exclusive attributes.
  5. Anti-aging and anti-disease measures are so amazing that there is no pressing requirement for population growth and both tradition and law make it mandatory for everyone to use them. This also means I, the monarch of the country, have no reason to fear death or require a replacement outside of being killed without any immediate medical attention available.
  6. The entire country is 100% monoracial and do not develop to have dramatically differing features from each other.
  7. Somehow tourism and immigration never happens. Neither does anyone who was born in the country leave the country. It's a vacuum. Military operations are handled using robots as soldiers.
  8. There is no religious conflict because no one there knows of religious teachings. (I am not an atheist myself but there was no other way I could think of to get over that problem.)

There are going to be people who have a problem with this.

 

People who place great importance on their sexuality. People who wish to be identified as a specific gender. People who believe that it is wrong that their world retains so little of the natural way of things. People who are discriminated against for their choice of occupation. People who still have issues with being discriminated against for a different reason, such as their recreational drug habits or parenting style. 

 

Because this hypothetical case exists in a vacuum, all of these people will be natives of the country in question and will not have been influenced by foreign ideas outside of ones they conceived of themselves via logic.

 

Let's put the focus again on sexual preferences and gender. Many people of modern wisdom believe these are not harmful. Live and let live. Some people think they are annoying but don't really consider them a threat.

 

I am not one of those people. I am especially not one of those people in the case I am the autocrat of a global superpower that has achieved the cultural norms described above.

 

All gendered individuals who take that part of their identity seriously and all individuals who fervently desire sex to be of great importance will have a problem with living in this hypothetical country.

 

What happens if the country tries to accommodate for their needs?

 

What does a person who makes a point of their gender being a very important aspect of them want?

 

What does a person who places extreme importance on their sexuality want?

 

Gender distinctions and cultural emphasis on sex respectively. If these are introduced and accepted into the system, who will that affect?

 

Everyone.

 

These are not trivial or irrelevant differences. The people with these differences that need it will very likely be motivated to ensure they can achieve the closest thing they can to a fulfilling life.

 

In the name of social justice they must do something about the cultural norms that marginalize them (if they are a large enough minority) and seek to educate others about what they believe is right and fair.

 

Arousal from pain (masochism) is a sexual preference. Arousal exclusively from prepubescents (pedophilia) is a sexual preference. Arousal from the consumption of feces (coprophilia) is a sexual preference. Arousal from murderous intentions (erotophonophilia) is a sexual preference. You know what all those kinds of people should be entitled to in our current society? A plausible defense of how you shouldn't judge people by their sexual preferences, colloquially, "Hey, some people are just more kinky than others. Nothing wrong with that." The only reason the latter three (or maybe just pedophiles) do not get off the hook for that is because of selective human prejudice, because people can't let those differences slide yet.

 

However, there are certain sexual preferences that people do get away with having just because that happens to be within greater understanding. This is where gender roles come into play.

 

Think about it.

 

Rape is okay to have as a sexual preference. It only becomes bad when someone goes and actually has the guts to do it for real. Anybody that gets offended or triggered by it otherwise is too sensitive.

 

And most of the time, that manifests in the form of men fantasizing about raping women, and women fantasizing about being raped by men. It doesn't even go in the same direction at a similar ratio because people have made gender distinctions. The gender distinctions even continue to apply in homosexual situations out of a desire for power dynamics between masculine and feminine.

 

Why would I, as autocrat of that global superpower, have sought to achieve the culture it has in the first place? Because I know that there are individuals who consider their differences within these categories important enough to need its recognition and support for them to be fulfilled with their lives, and that they cannot be accepted into the system without revolutionizing the way my country's people think.

 

They might bring back all the shitty things that happen because of emphasis on gender and sex into my society.

 

What do I do with them?

 

I could let the indoctrinated citizens impose the cultural norms on them. That is allowing for invalidation.

 

I could isolate them into concentration camps to prevent them from becoming influential. That is actively causing oppression.

 

They are human beings like anyone else with families, feelings, and lives. They have needs that are recognized today as valid and relevant. There is supposed to be a reason I shouldn't subject them to injustices.

 

Like hell I care though. There are more important things to protect. If that means putting them through hell so they will remain as powerless as I can render them then it's worth it.

 

I have a country where people can choose to have sex with consenting individuals when they happen to feel like they don't have something better to be doing and where people are not hurt for any aesthetic or occupational choices / biological or behavioral traits that could have been considered distinct by expectations of gender. Screw the people who don't think that's enough for them because they need sex to be a bigger deal and for gender to gain significant relevance again.

 

tl;dr: Differences will always remain important for as long as people want to make or keep them important. This applies whether they are the ones within the social norm or outside of the social norm, and because we are not alone for as long as we are part of a society, most people are going to have to put up with something they don't like about their lives in it.

 

tl;dr 2: This idea of how humans should have solidarity amongst themselves simply to avoid hatred is ridiculous.


I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#2 Blue Leafeon

Blue Leafeon

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 16 April 2017 - 11:05 AM

I have nothing to add, but I will say that was a great read. You have some good points here.


IUfb9Eg.png


#3 zac

zac

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the magical land of cleve

Posted 16 April 2017 - 03:22 PM

Interesting read, and as usual I mostly agree with the idea here lol. It's pretty clear to me that most of the world that wants everyone to accommodate them have no idea what they're asking, and the people being asked to accommodate overreact to this spectacularly. My idea of "acceptance" seems to be drastically different from what other people in the "oppressed groups" seem to feel it is. Imo accepting the differences in the world just means acknowledging their existence, not being afraid of them, and not condemning those that perpetuate the differences. I don't want a world where everyone is gay, I don't want a single race of people, I don't even want a world where people don't see the differences between gender and race and everything else. Those differences are necessary and good. Imo it would be fine if a straight person said "yeah it's fine to be gay as long as I don't have to see it", and the gay person in question can reply with "yeah it's fine to be straight as long as I don't have to see it". Currently it's more like "yeah it's fine to be gay as long as I don't have to see it, meanwhile let me go make out with my girlfriend and have it be totally acceptable and you have to just sit there and watch."

Tl:dr acceptance and equality are ideas that have been skewed, and that's what needs to be addressed imo. If everyone sought true equality it would be that much easier for people like me to "fight oppression"

#4 Blue Leafeon

Blue Leafeon

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 17 April 2017 - 11:12 AM

Those differences are necessary and good. Imo it would be fine if a straight person said "yeah it's fine to be gay as long as I don't have to see it", and the gay person in question can reply with "yeah it's fine to be straight as long as I don't have to see it".

I thought it was offensive to even remotely imply "you can be gay as long as I don't have to see it." Which I guess makes that quote even more remarkable in that both sides can say that to the other. lol


IUfb9Eg.png


#5 zac

zac

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the magical land of cleve

Posted 17 April 2017 - 12:49 PM

I don't want to see anybody making out in public haha. Idc if people wanna hold hands or whatever, but a person's sexuality has no place being visible in public.

#6 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 17 April 2017 - 04:17 PM

I thought it was offensive to even remotely imply "you can be gay as long as I don't have to see it." Which I guess makes that quote even more remarkable in that both sides can say that to the other. lol

It kind of is because it shows that you haven't actually accepted gay people as normal human beings with their own desires and appetites. Though that said it usually kind of applies more to media than to public displays of sexuality, because gay people have far fewer romances and porn readily available for their orientation. This is why you'll see queer people get all mad over why some mainstream work doesn't involve them or only gives them a bad reputation, because it reminds them of how heterosexuality is considered to be so much of a norm that they either aren't considered to truly exist or that when they do it's to make them seem fucked up when all they want to be seen as is like everybody else.

 

That's also why this topic focuses on what someone has to do to convince society to actually accommodate for their differences though.


I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#7 zac

zac

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the magical land of cleve

Posted 17 April 2017 - 04:39 PM

It's rude ONLY if the straight person in question thinks they should be able to put their own heteronormative behaviors on display without being discriminated against. As it is the idea of "just don't bother me with your sexuality" is enough acceptance that LGBT+ people could at least be comfortable knowing they can be themselves.

Edit: I think the best way to have "equality" is to just have everyone keep it to the privacy of their homes.

#8 Blue Leafeon

Blue Leafeon

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 18 April 2017 - 11:43 AM

Edit: I think the best way to have "equality" is to just have everyone keep it to the privacy of their homes.

Amen brother. Not that you can do that with media though. :/

 

because it reminds them of how heterosexuality is considered to be so much of a norm that they either aren't considered to truly exist or that when they do it's to make them seem fucked up when all they want to be seen as is like everybody else.

Meanwhile, nobody thinks that asexuals are discriminated against, despite the fact that everyone will always assume a character is either straight or gay. 8D


IUfb9Eg.png


#9 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 19 April 2017 - 04:59 AM

Asexuals are discriminated against, people are just biased to their own situation and either don't realize they've only stopped being a dick to the groups they've been convinced not to be one towards or just don't care and are dicks about it anyway, chances are it's related to them not seeing asexuals as human beings in general too. I've heard someone say sexuality makes half a person for a reason.


I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#10 Blue Leafeon

Blue Leafeon

    Mega Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:19 PM

It just recently occurred to me that the point of this topic wasn't to ask a question and debate the point behind it, but rather to answer the question. Why am I so horrible at understanding vain's points? lol


IUfb9Eg.png





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users