Can we even think logically about issues any more?

Politics and religion.

Moderator: JasonNC

User avatar
Woah! Double lightsaber! Double lightsaber all the way!
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:42 pm
PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:52 pm
This piece by Sean Davis struck me as very good and thoughtful. It came out a couple of weeks ago (before the major stuff that's happened in the last week with the SCOTUS decisions), but it really raises an issue that's been bugging me. We live in a land of pundits, and it seems that there are certain issues that are taboo, certain thoughts that one must not think, even though a lot of them are very logical and would have been normative a little while ago. Case in point, the weird case of Rachel Dolezal and the possibly even weirder (oh, I'm going to be in trouble for saying that) case of Caitlyn Jenner.

Davis makes one amazing point that I think we really ought to think about when comparing these two people and their situations (if we as a people are even capable of such subtlety of thought): "Nearly overnight, it would appear that the long-standing ideas of race as a social construct and gender as a biological construct have been flipped on their heads."

Check it out: http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/12/if- ... r-a-woman/
Image
Quote

Snarky!
Posts: 13692
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:01 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:36 am
Melissa Harris-Perry and Alyson Hobbs have raised the question of whether it's possible that Rachel Dolezal is "transracial".

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/melissa-harr ... -be-black/

So, to answer your question, no. We live in a society where facts and objective reality are inconsequential in the face of feelings. If you feel like you are a woman, you are, regardless of the reality of your birth. Same goes for your race, apparently. If someone says something that makes you feel bad, they've committed a hate crime and should be jailed, or at least have their life and career ruined. The words written in the founding documents that set America's laws only have the meaning that is ascribed to them by the ruling class, specifically five unelected people in robes, and the meanings of those words can vary on their whims. And let's not forget that consensual sex between an adult man and woman can instantly become rape at any time after the act if the woman decides it was a bad idea.

Welcome to the land of the feels and the home of the lame.
Quote
User avatar
Woah! Double lightsaber! Double lightsaber all the way!
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:42 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 10:44 am
Yeah, but what astonishes me about all this is what comes out in Davis' article. Because, while it's true that several people have suggested that Dolezal might actually be black because she sees herself that way, most people don't accept that. But Bruce Jenner changes his name and says he's a woman (without even having the...ahem...plumbing re-routed, much less the impossibility of exchanging Y for X chromosomes as Davis points out), and we are told by many of those same people that we have to accept that he/she is, in fact, a woman.

Now, I realize part of people's problems with Dolezal is that she's a liar, having claimed a black man as her father who was not and a young black man who was her adopted brother as her son and having lied about being the victim of hate crimes. While that is a distinction between the two, it doesn't seem to be driving people's notion of reality on this. Most of the same people who call Caitlyn Jenner a woman say Dolezal cannot be black, because she was born white.

This comment is still the one that gets me. And tell me what your thoughts are on this:

Sean Davis wrote:Nearly overnight, it would appear that the long-standing ideas of race as a social construct and gender as a biological construct have been flipped on their heads.


I mean, that's astonishing! Think about that! Two people can have the same levels of melanin, similar hair and bone structure, and talk with the same dialect and be considered different races based mostly on their--or their ancestors'--geographical heritage when biologically there is almost no difference between them. But a person can have a Y chromosome and a penis and still be said to be a woman. And the same people will fight to say the two people must be considered different races and that Caitlyn Jenner must be considered female.

It's madness!
Image
Quote

Snarky!
Posts: 13692
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:01 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:05 pm
I believe the only difference is a matter of conditioning. How long have we been inundated with "sexuality is a rainbow" stuff? Gender being a flexible concept is easily rolled into that idea. If sexuality is, rather than a binary, a gigantic spectrum of every possible kind of attraction, then it's not a big leap to the idea that your birth plumbing is nothing more than a suggestion (or, as I've also seen argued, a set of shackles chosen by your parents, to force you into a gender identity that you didn't choose). This train has been building up steam for years.

Rachel Dolezal is, to stretch that metaphor, just driving the first stake on a new railroad. And it's not surprising that the first reaction from the supposedly tolerant intelligentsia is to throw out cries of "appropriation"; how many years has it been since Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were 100% opposed to homosexual marriage? How long did it take for their views to "evolve"? Young people today have it driven into their heads that you have to be a put-upon minority in order to have value; victims are constantly celebrated. Dolezal just cashed in on a little of that action, kind of like liberal darling Elizabeth "Fauxahontas" Warren. The chief driver is most likely that no liberal media darling has stepped forward to really push the idea yet. Once it gets some momentum, it will transform practically overnight from a horrible appropriation into a woman being true to her real inner self, throwing off the shackles of whiteness to embrace the powerful black woman inside.
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:17 pm
That's an interesting Federalist article, and you guys have made some good observations.

It's tragic and kind of gross that after all the expensive 'feminization' plastic surgery to the face and neck, Jenner still looks like a man in drag. The real 'beautification' -- seen in the featured photos -- was accomplished by photoshopping and expensive make-up.

It reminds me of a 'person' who works at our local bank. The person, who happens to be very nice person, was a gay East Indian man. The guy had long black hair and a big jaw with a 5 o'clock shadow. A long time ago he looked somewhat healthy. After several treatments (surgery, hormone therapies, etc.) the 'he' part is currently debatable. Or to be more accurate, extremely injured.

My stomach crawls when I see 'the person' now. You know that feeling deep in your gut when you see a very injured or sick fellow human being? It's like an instinctual reaction of empathy/sadness/shock/alarm. I get the same feeling when seeing hurt animals. You want to help them somehow. And you can't. So you just want to leave so you stop feeling bad for them.

Anyway. The bank person's body, injured by whatever concoctions of hormones and surgeries they've had, is clearly in chaos. Hair is falling out in the back. Face is bloated. Neck has gotten skinnier. Arm muscles are drastically wasting away. Abdomen is... yuck. This person wears a 'dress' (like a giant flowery bandage) every time I see them, and has to sit all day at the teller. When they get up to get my money, I'm like a deer in headlights trying to look away from atrophied buttocks and legs. Legs that must have lost HALF their mass. Like concentration camp stuff. The person's skin is in rebellion, rippling with appears to be massive allergic reactions. I could go on and on about other tragic signs, but you guys get the picture. This person has asked doctors to mess with nature, and a very hurt nature has gone into rebellion and reacting with symptoms of alarm.

This is my first experience, over a three yr period, of slowly observing a 'trans person' go from start to maybe the finish. I got a snapshot look every 2 weeks, unless the person was gone for a few months for whatever treatments. All I can say is that I don't think I fall under any category that would put me ideologically at odds with this 'person's choice' or lifestyle. I'm not religiously against it. Nor politically. Instead, I just feel like I've seen a fellow human being undergo a horrible, self-injuring transformation -- leaving them crippled and sick. Even worse, the person just looks like a crippled and sick gay man in drag with heavy make-up. Nothing physically feminine, nor mentally feminine for that matter, seems to shine from 'her'.

Men and women from around the neighbourhood seem to agree. No one is laughing. They're all talking about it like it's quite tragic. It's also a big introduction and perhaps warning to the community about what trans stuff does to people.
Quote

Snarky!
Posts: 13692
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:01 pm
PostPosted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:16 pm
And, as per our conversation above, if you were to raise those kind of issues publicly, you'd be attacked as "transphobic" and shouted down for daring to be critical of this person's choice. And then I'd be attacked for saying it's a choice. I'm troubled less by the recent moves in our culture than by the fact that differing opinions are apparently no longer allowed to be spoken aloud (or typed).
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:01 pm
Well said, yeah. The good thing is that a lot of people who bought into the new (made-up, cynical) liberal/progressive worldview, as continually explained to them by the media and government, are getting somewhat disillusioned. They're like: Wait a minute. Why are they sounding so tyrannical and intolerant? If someone doesn't want to be involved with those worldviews, or doesn't want to bow down to them, why is everyone getting so heavy about it? Doesn't seem like freedom and love to me.

I'm not a very politically correct person at all, and must constantly pick my battles (like most people) just to conserve energy and get on with more important things. I think the PC stuff is all cynical invention absolutely designed to mess with us and keep us as divided bitches. I think we should more funny, more cynical, more sarcastic, more irreverent to sacred cows, and more intense with evidence-based research to challenge everything. Leave all the emotionalism in the trash-can and walk out into the human arena as a free-thinking individual, unafraid to speak your mind. Or at least strong enough to not run into the safety of (fake) dominant opinion.

This world portrayed to us by the media is full of nonsense, deception, and so many sneaky attempts to control/create perception. The thing is, we are free, with a right to comment and protect our perceptions so as to keep being free. Some self-appointed control freaks don't think that's true? Then watch what happens when they try to really take those rights away. Good luck.

I don't like unthinking group opinions and hiding behind crowds; all that emotional BS that doesn't care whether the facts are sound or not. I will challenge any sacred cow. Any sacred BS stories, with made up heroes and villains, designed to mess with our minds. 21st century myth demolition is my specialty. Mind you, I don't recommend it, if only because it takes a lot of energy. At least I still recommend being fearless in most whatever you say, day to day. They may try to pee-pee slap a few of us, but they won't be getting most of us. The average guy is generally left alone to be a politically incorrect rockstar. Irreverent small fish, swimming free. Whereas the popular rebel in the spotlight, attracting loads of attention, may have something to worry about. He may be scapegoated and made an example of. The sharks may come looking for that fish.

Live free, Heli, and spout politically incorrect napalm whenever possible.
Quote
User avatar
Chief Commander of the Skrull Horde
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:20 pm
PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2015 12:27 pm
Heli wrote:Rachel Dolezal is, to stretch that metaphor, just driving the first stake on a new railroad.


her railroad is doomed for 1 very important reason.... The Civil Rights Act of 1964.

If anyone is black, than real blacks no longer hold special protection. Black Americans in support of racist legislation like the Civil Rights Act will never allow this to come to pass. If it does, it'll be a century from now.
Quote
User avatar
Chief Commander of the Skrull Horde
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:20 pm
PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2015 12:31 pm
Heli wrote:And, as per our conversation above, if you were to raise those kind of issues publicly, you'd be attacked as "transphobic" and shouted down for daring to be critical of this person's choice. And then I'd be attacked for saying it's a choice. I'm troubled less by the recent moves in our culture than by the fact that differing opinions are apparently no longer allowed to be spoken aloud (or typed).


I got into it with a level headed relative who was "proud" of Jenner. I argued he had a mental illness and needed therapy, not cheering on his body mutilation. She damn near lost her hur de hur... I said, what's different about him and those who suffer from BIID (Body Integrity Identity Disorder), don't those people "deserve to be happy" too, shouldn't they be allowed to severe their limbs to feel better about themselves? She simply said "its not the same!" so I disengaged.
Quote

Snarky!
Posts: 13692
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:01 pm
PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2015 1:16 pm
"It's totally different for reasons!"
Quote
Next

Return to It matters!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron