[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47808328]If the norm was good as it is, there'd be no need to change it.
The progressive view is to say parts of the norm (in this case, though certainly not a view shared by many progressives, that incest should be shunned) are bad, and thus we should change them. Not simply "we need to change everything that's normal because normal is by definition bad".[/QUOTE]
Don't give me that, I said you find everything that is different from the norm BETTER THAN the norm. Whether or not that means you find normalcy "bad" is just semantics.
And who are you to decide that even parts of it is bad? Normalcy is established over time by the majority and is biased to the majority, constantly fighting the norm upsets so much in society it's crazy. That doesn't mean it's always bad, but it often can be.
And the way you speak of it you are really confirming my preconceptions about progressives, you really do follow it as though it is a religion.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47808328]
Which is obviously a matter of opinion.
And my opinion is that if you discriminate against homosexuals, or people who have incest, you are treating them unfairly and hence are a bigot.
[/QUOTE]
What does that even mean "discriminate against people who have incest"?
Incest is an act and not a psychological "error" like homosexuality is. How exactly are people "with incest" discriminated against?
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47808328]
Gay pride is about overcoming societal opposition. People are proud not to be gay, but to be gay despite homophobes fighting against them. "I'm here, I'm queer, get used to it" etc.[/QUOTE]
What?
I am not "proud" not to be gay. I am just not gay, it's not something I parade or tell people.
I don't let my sexuality define me.
And I don't see how prideparades in any way combat homophobia, if anything it reinforces it and even converts people who were previously fine with homosexuals.
Most people today are in fact fine with "normal" homosexuals that don't take part in something that's so degrading, for all parties.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47808328]
Also: Why even care about evolution? Homosexuality contradicts evolutional pressure to procreate, but where's the harm in that? It's not a defect in any [I]practical[/I] sense.
[/QUOTE]
To answer your first question: Why not? And what do you mean?
Yes it does "contradict the evolutionary pressure to procreate", which is why it is either some kind of population control or it's a mental error. So it's a defect from the normal state, and when I say that I don't mean it's either bad or good, it just IS.
[QUOTE=bitches;47808404]clearly trans people are the same as those who claim to be fantasy or inanimate objects
nevermind how actual science supports the claim
nevermind actually talking to trans people to understand what they're going through
nevermind psychological studies into the mental stress caused by the condition
nope, clearly just those slippery slope progressives trying to ruin everything
given that you're actively shunning research in favor of upset fervor, not backed up by any argument but that you've heard it one way all your life, bigot is a really fair term for you[/QUOTE]
I NEVER meant to say it wasn't a real mental illness, and of course they aren't the same as most toasters.
However that was a poorly constructed sentence that sort of conveyed that, so I see why you are triggered and hope you haven't contracted PTSD.
Some trans people genuinely think they were born in the wrong body, I know.
People with some eating disorders really do think they are fat too, except we treat that with force feeding, not liposuction.
And I know anorexia is deadly, so the comparison is a bit unfair, but many trans-people who actually have body dysmorphia commit suicide even after having a sex-change.
Maybe just maybe, fewer actual trans people would kill themselves if they instead got the help they really needed. The help many progressives find bigoted.
As for the slippery slope, just look at what the "pride parade" used to be and what it is now.
Look at how pedophilia is not slowly being normalized, admittedly the main reason being to sell clothes to "tweens", but it's still relevant.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808612]
What?
I am not "proud" not to be gay. I am just not gay, it's not something I parade or tell people.
I don't let my sexuality define me.
[/QUOTE]
Re-read his post.
His point (I believe) was that gay people aren't proud just because they're gay, but because they're gay in spite of rampant homophobia and violence against gays.
Also that thing you said about pride parades converting people is also a fuckhuge vlaim that needs to be sources.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808612]
I NEVER meant to say it wasn't a real mental illness, and of course they aren't the same as most toasters.
However that was a poorly constructed sentence that sort of conveyed that, so I see why you are triggered and hope you haven't contracted PTSD.
Some trans people genuinely think they were born in the wrong body, I know.
People with some eating disorders really do think they are fat too, except we treat that with force feeding, not liposuction.
And I know anorexia is deadly, so the comparison is a bit unfair, but many trans-people who actually have body dysmorphia commit suicide even after having a sex-change.
Maybe just maybe, fewer actual trans people would kill themselves if they instead got the help they really needed. The help many progressives find bigoted.[/QUOTE]
You're doing the same thing. You're denying actual research in favor of 'reparative therapy' that contradicts science. You're condoning torture because you don't care to inform yourself about the condition, instead insisting that all trans people are simply mistaken.
The parallels to homosexuality are very direct. If you were born 20 years earlier you'd be saying the same thing of homosexuality. You don't have any argument.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808612]
[B]Some trans people genuinely think they were born in the wrong body, I know.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
Bro, you really, really need to read some shit.
"In a first-of-its-kind study, Zhou et al. (1995) found that in a region of the brain called the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc), a region known for sex and anxiety responses, MTF transsexuals have a female-normal size while FTM transsexuals have a male-normal size. While the transsexuals studied had taken hormones, this was accounted for by including non-transsexual male and female controls who, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still retained sizes typical for their gender."
It's not that they "genuinely think they were born in the wrong body"
It's that their brains are LITERALLY almost indistinguishable from those of their gender.
[QUOTE=bitches;47808654]You're doing the same thing. You're denying actual research in favor of 'reparative therapy' that contradicts science. You're condoning torture because you don't care to inform yourself about the condition, instead insisting that all trans people are simply mistaken.
The parallels to homosexuality are very direct. If you were born 20 years earlier you'd be saying the same thing of homosexuality. You don't have any argument.[/QUOTE]
Oh no you didn't.
I am saying gender dysphoria is a real mental illness and needs to be treated as such.
As I said, we do not treat anorexia with liposuction and call it a day.
Of course you are free to chop off your penis if you want to, all I am saying is that MAYBE you get some real therapy before doing so.
People with body dysphoria find therapy to be torture too, until they finally, maybe, get cured.
This doesn't mean I think we should FORCE people to go to therapy for gender dysphoria, the issue is that they are told that it is wrong and bigoted to even suggest such a thing as therapy for a mental illness.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;47808679]Bro, you really, really need to read some shit.
It's not that they "genuinely think they were born in the wrong body"
It's that their brains are LITERALLY almost indistinguishable from those of their gender.[/QUOTE]
I know of these people and support them and their rights, I am talking about those who suffer from body dysphoria I remember reading that the actual biological defect is rare, while mental illness is the common one.
I may be wrong of course.
Also jesus fuck am I sorry for derailing and my walls of text.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808768]Oh no you didn't.
I am saying gender dysphoria is a real mental illness and needs to be treated as such.
As I said, we do not treat anorexia with liposuction and call it a day.
Of course you are free to chop off your penis if you want to, all I am saying is that MAYBE you get some real therapy before doing so.
People with body dysphoria find therapy to be torture too, [B]until they finally, maybe, get cured.[/B]
This doesn't mean I think we should FORCE people to go to therapy for gender dysphoria, the issue is that they are told that it is wrong and bigoted to even suggest such a thing as therapy for a mental illness.
I know of these people and support them and their rights, I am talking about those who suffer from body dysphoria I remember reading that the actual biological defect is rare, while mental illness is the common one.
I may be wrong of course.
Also jesus fuck am I sorry for derailing and my walls of text.[/QUOTE]
You know what the cure for transgender body dysphoria is?
Here's a hint: It's called allowing them to transition to life as a woman.
Also it's hilariously ignorant how you say "you are free to chop off your penis", as if SRS isn't a highly delicate surgery done by trained professionals and nearly visually undetectable from a cis woman's natural vagina
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808612]Don't give me that, I said you find everything that is different from the norm BETTER THAN the norm. Whether or not that means you find normalcy "bad" is just semantics. [/QUOTE]
Uh, no. I have no problem with, for example, society's decision to reject people who don't shower. "It's normal" is not the reason I dislike stigmatisation of incest.
[QUOTE]And who are you to decide that even parts of it is bad? Normalcy is established over time by the majority and is biased to the majority, constantly fighting the norm upsets so much in society it's crazy. That doesn't mean it's always bad, but it often can be.[/QUOTE]
People are entitled to their opinions. My opinion happens to be at odds with society's opinion in this case.
[QUOTE]And the way you speak of it you are really confirming my preconceptions about progressives, you really do follow it as though it is a religion.[/QUOTE]
What's your point? That everything people care about is a religion?
Throughout my posts in this thread I have given rational arguments for my position that derive from my moral values.
[QUOTE]What does that even mean "discriminate against people who have incest"?
Incest is an act and not a psychological "error" like homosexuality is. How exactly are people "with incest" discriminated against?[/QUOTE]
"having incest" as in "having sex". Yes, you're discriminating against people who perform a certain act, because they perform that act, whether you think that discrimination is justified or not. I don't consider that act to be morally questionable, so I think this discrimination is unjust.
[QUOTE]And I don't see how prideparades in any way combat homophobia, if anything it reinforces it and even converts people who were previously fine with homosexuals.
Most people today are in fact fine with "normal" homosexuals that don't take part in something that's so degrading, for all parties.[/QUOTE]
I said that was the point of it, not that it was effective. Whether it is, I don't know, I don't have the statistics.
[QUOTE]To answer your first question: Why not? And what do you mean?
Yes it does "contradict the evolutionary pressure to procreate", which is why it is either some kind of population control or it's a mental error. So it's a defect from the normal state, and when I say that I don't mean it's either bad or good, it just IS.[/QUOTE]
I mean that natural selection is at odds with my (and most people's, really) morality. Should we just let natural selection do its work and leave disabled people without proper healthcare because evolution demands it?
The fact that things like homosexuality are defects in the context of evolution only [I]matters[/I] if you care more about evolution than people's happiness. And you'd be an ass if you did.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47808809]You know what the cure for transgender body dysphoria is?
Here's a hint: It's called allowing them to transition to life as a woman.[/QUOTE]
I never said that wasn't allowed.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47808809] Also it's hilariously ignorant how you say "you are free to chop off your penis", as if SRS isn't a highly delicate surgery done by trained professionals and nearly visually undetectable from a cis woman's natural vagina[/QUOTE]
That's not me being ignorant, that's you being sensitive.
I am very aware of the intricacy involved, I was just being slightly short saying it.
I could've worded it: "You are free to take the wonderful journy and higly advanced surgery required to remove you penis and sculpt a beautiful and free vagina [Insert video of surgery footage from youtube]"
But that seemed unnecessary since my message was delivered with the intended amount or "spite" if you will.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47808841]
The fact that things like homosexuality are defects in the context of evolution only [I]matters[/I] if you care more about evolution than people's happiness. And you'd be an ass if you did.[/QUOTE]
I never said I cared more about evolution than people's happiness.
I just said something about what homosexuality is, and I derived what I said from logic and the basis of evolution.
I again have nothing against homosexuals, only against the individuals who are "flaming".
And I still don't understand how people ITT were discriminating against incestuous couples.
Or how they are discriminated against in the real world.
We don't ask people if they have fucking their sibling when we hire them.
Anyhow I doubt this discussion will go anywhere, the majority of facepunch likely already think me a "good old rebel" as it were.
Although I have never spoken out against any LGBTQ people or their rights in society per-se but rather the "promoting" or marketing if you will, of them.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808021]The problem is that you (the progressives) always deem anything different from the norm to be better than the norm[/QUOTE]
That's a pretty blanket statement.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808021]Today people are marching in parades shouting that they are "proud" of the fact that they bone other men in the arse or women proud of scissoring other women.
How is that an accomplishment? How is an environmentally gained psychological "fuck up" (At least evolutionary, unless it's some kind of built in crowd-control) something to be proud of?
I'll accept homosexuals, but I won't applaud them.[/QUOTE]
You're wrong here, for sure; try and understand this.
Gay pride and gay pride parades aren't anything to do with straight people. If some kind of filter could be turned on so that straight people couldn't even see them, it would be. Gay pride parades are aimed at closeted gay/bi/bicurious people, to let them know it's ok to be gay ect. The fact that straight people can see or are aware of "gay pride" is just collateral damage resulting from the need to display the message to everyone, since the people that need to see it are essentially hidden.
The only thing LGBTQ people have to be "proud" of is that they overcame their apprehensions and decided to live life in line with the way they felt, without letting fear get in the way of it. That's all it's about, being proud you overcame fear.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808872]
Although I have never spoken out against any LGBTQ people or their rights in society per-se but rather the "promoting" or marketing if you will, of them.[/QUOTE]
"You can be gay and stuff, just don't act all gay around me ew gross"
incest in most cases is pretty gross imho.
in the case of the OP video I think it's fine however, I mean it's not like they knew they were half-brothers.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47808328] Discrimination is never a triviality.[/QUOTE]
"Discrimination" in that instance is survival. I of all people know that HIV is serious shit, and that it's not something you want to Normalize or rid the stigma of. People fucking die from it.
[editline]26th May 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=EcksDee;47808679]Bro, you really, really need to read some shit.
"In a first-of-its-kind study, Zhou et al. (1995) found that in a region of the brain called the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc), a region known for sex and anxiety responses, MTF transsexuals have a female-normal size while FTM transsexuals have a male-normal size. While the transsexuals studied had taken hormones, this was accounted for by including non-transsexual male and female controls who, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still retained sizes typical for their gender."
It's not that they "genuinely think they were born in the wrong body"
[B]It's that their brains are LITERALLY almost indistinguishable from those of their gender.[/B][/QUOTE]
Serious question, could you argue that it's a chicken and an egg thing? Genuinely asking this because from what I understand is that a lot of the time they study people who are already on hormone therapy, which would change a lot of how it works as it's causing a chemical shift. That's at least the studies I've seen. It's a bit of a strange conclusion to say that the brains match up if they're taking medications that will change the hormone cycle.
[QUOTE=Nikota;47809419]"Discrimination" in that instance is survival. I of all people know that HIV is serious shit, and that it's not something you want to Normalize or rid the stigma of. People fucking die from it.
[editline]26th May 2015[/editline]
Serious question, could you argue that it's a chicken and an egg thing? Genuinely asking this because from what I understand is that a lot of the time they study people who are already on hormone therapy, which would change a lot of how it works as it's causing a chemical shift. That's at least the studies I've seen. It's a bit of a strange conclusion to say that the brains match up if they're taking medications that will change the hormone cycle.[/QUOTE]
Read the quote again yo
"While the transsexuals studied had taken hormones, this was accounted for by including non-transsexual male and female controls who, for a variety of medical reasons, had experienced hormone reversal. The controls still retained sizes typical for their gender."
Aka non-transsexuals who received hormone therapy (For whatever reason) didn't experience this change in brain structure.
Ergo the structure is directly related to gender identity, and not hormones.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;47796255]so when can we finally agree that the stigma around incest is pointless[/QUOTE]
except for the fact that genetic diversity is a real thing and if your DNA becomes too similar then you're bound to have fucked up kids.
[QUOTE=Dez56;47807830]This is pretty sad to see a lot of weirdos here justifying incest to be honest.[/QUOTE]
Really?
I for one would never commit an act of incest, the thought disgusts me, but just because it disgusts me doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed between two consenting adults who have no method of producing a biological child between them.
It is purely an issue of morality. Nobody gets hurt in this case. If nobody is getting hurt, then why on Earth shouldn't they be allowed to do it?
[QUOTE=Kylel999;47810039]except for the fact that genetic diversity is a real thing and if your DNA becomes too similar then you're bound to have fucked up kids.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely, but I don't think that was his context.
[QUOTE=Nikota;47809419]"Discrimination" in that instance is survival. I of all people know that HIV is serious shit, and that it's not something you want to Normalize or rid the stigma of. People fucking die from it.[/QUOTE]
Have you even read the article?
It's not about having unprotected sex. And the risk is [I]very[/I] small if you're wearing a condom.
In any case, it's not just about sex; HIV victims are ostracized and blamed for their condition. And while it may be true that often enough they got infected by being reckless, that kind of view just hurts people. It doesn't promote safe sex.
[QUOTE=Nikota;47808197]Fuck man, I'm bisexual heavily leaning on gay and how do you think I feel about a lot of it. I was pretty strong about a lot of activism when I was in highschool and the actions of activists pretty much woke me up from a lot of stuff. There's too much primarily identifying by something because people feel they have to, and defining their life around it. It's especially a problem within the Gay community as people fall into stereotypes from it and it produces some extremely bad and risky behavior.
Shit like this article from one of the main LGBT newspapers woke me up from a lot of it and basically told me that the fight was won and it was all about trivialities now on. [URL]http://www.advocate.com/politics/commentary/2011/09/27/oped-live-world-where-everyone-has-hiv[/URL][/QUOTE]
The battle isn't really over yet, but there was a person who had that talking point on another board I go on. I thought that it was ridiculous since it's like claiming that shooting, beating, or stabbing people is okay because they'll recover from their injury. Aside from it being a painful experience that reduces your life expectancy, it's also expensive and time-consuming to treat.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47808021]I haven't gotten jack in reverse.
The problem is that you (the progressives) always deem anything different from the norm to be better than the norm. Therefore all you are doing is diluting and slowly killing the norm.
There are plenty of people who disagree with you, and if those opinions are aired they are called bigots.
Today people are marching in parades shouting that they are "proud" of the fact that they bone other men in the arse or women proud of scissoring other women.
How is that an accomplishment? How is an environmentally gained psychological "fuck up" (At least evolutionary, unless it's some kind of built in crowd-control) something to be proud of?
I'll accept homosexuals, but I won't applaud them.
Video is pretty related:
[video=youtube;8FHJHjFWu94]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FHJHjFWu94[/video][/QUOTE]
[url=http://weeklysift.com/2012/09/10/the-distress-of-the-privileged/]This article[/url] might as well be about you and it's glorious.
[QUOTE=Levithan;47810703][url=http://weeklysift.com/2012/09/10/the-distress-of-the-privileged/]This article[/url] might as well be about you and it's glorious.[/QUOTE]
I have got to admit, it took some will-power to read an article that actually has the word "privileged" in the title...
The author seems to have little to no understanding of reality, spending most of his time talking about a movie and a fable.
He makes up a term, and then proceeds to link a few examples of what he feels should fall under his new umbrella of his. And then that is the new truth, the truth that you subscribe to.
In the future, if you wish to have a discussion, try citing the parts of the article you think apply.
Maybe even go as far as thinking and typing a bit on your own.
The article is a stupid piece meant only to create another buzzword so that people like you can paste a link to it, avoiding the need to think and the risk of being triggered, and go back to stroking your own ego.
In the end I don't feel the article applies either to this discussion, and I can't make a link between the post you quoted and what that article is talking about. I do not fear becoming "less privileged" because gays have become more privileged. (I have to assume this is what you meant.)
i fucking love dainbramage
he's like a shadow thisisspain
if you put the two in a room, you'd end up with a being so centrist that if he ever ran for election, people wouldn't be sure whether to vote for him, or put him in a shop window and put clothes on him
You can't hold an intelligent argument while waiving the merits of the opposing argument off as "triggered".
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47811026]I have got to admit, it took some will-power to read an article that actually has the word "privileged" in the title...
The author seems to have little to no understanding of reality, spending most of his time talking about a movie and a fable.
He makes up a term, and then proceeds to link a few examples of what he feels should fall under his new umbrella of his. And then that is the new truth, the truth that you subscribe to.
In the future, if you wish to have a discussion, try citing the parts of the article you think apply.
Maybe even go as far as thinking and typing a bit on your own.
The article is a stupid piece meant only to create another buzzword so that people like you can paste a link to it, avoiding the need to think and the risk of being triggered, and go back to stroking your own ego.
In the end I don't feel the article applies either to this discussion, and I can't make a link between the post you quoted and what that article is talking about. I do not fear becoming "less privileged" because gays have become more privileged. (I have to assume this is what you meant.)[/QUOTE]
Can people actually report this joker? This account has been banned before for being a alt gimmick, and you're just fucking feeding it you guys.
[QUOTE=fenrirsulfu;47811026]I have got to admit, it took some will-power to read an article that actually has the word "privileged" in the title...
The author seems to have little to no understanding of reality, spending most of his time talking about a movie and a fable.
He makes up a term, and then proceeds to link a few examples of what he feels should fall under his new umbrella of his. And then that is the new truth, the truth that you subscribe to.
In the future, if you wish to have a discussion, try citing the parts of the article you think apply.
Maybe even go as far as thinking and typing a bit on your own.
The article is a stupid piece meant only to create another buzzword so that people like you can paste a link to it, avoiding the need to think and the risk of being triggered, and go back to stroking your own ego.
In the end I don't feel the article applies either to this discussion, and I can't make a link between the post you quoted and what that article is talking about. I do not fear becoming "less privileged" because gays have become more privileged. (I have to assume this is what you meant.)[/QUOTE]
I think the point behind the article, which I would say was poorly conveyed and needlessly inflammatory, is that no one is obligated to make you feel comfortable.
Just because sexuality is personally offensive to you does not mean that the people displaying it are obligated to stop, so long as they are following the law. And just because you find it personally distasteful does not mean it is ethically or morally wrong.
When you talk about things like gay pride parades "marketing" homosexuality, as though it were a thing that could be sold to begin with, I can't help but feel as though you're assuming some malevolent intent where none is evident to justify your disgust. I understand some of your complaints, and would agree that the lack of critical self awareness in pride groups is an issue worth acknowledging. I just don't think people walking around in assless chaps is a big deal.
[editline]26th May 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=bitches;47811101]You can't hold an intelligent argument while waiving the merits of the opposing argument off as "triggered".[/QUOTE]
Using an article in place of an argument is poor form to begin with.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;47811320]no one is obligated to make you feel comfortable.[/QUOTE]
Surely you see how this thought process could be easily reversed so that it is not in your favour.
[editline]blah[/editline]
In fact it wouldn't be in anyone's favour if we all actually took it to heart.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47811343]Surely you see how this thought process could be easily reversed so that it is not in your favour.[/QUOTE]
I don't follow.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47811343]Surely you see how this thought process could be easily reversed so that it is not in your favour.[/QUOTE]
Sure, but would it be justified?
LGBT people aren't harming you, or preventing you from doing anything. When they're prevented from being equivalent in the eyes of society by the norm, they are being harmed and prevented from doing things.
So based on that, and how one is harmful and the other isn't, would appealing to that rule in such a way that you find favourable really be so justified?
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;47811359]I don't follow.[/QUOTE]
Well if nobody is obligated to make other's feel comfortable, we have no obligation to make homosexuals feels comfortable.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47811383]Well if nobody is obligated to make other's feel comfortable, we have no obligation to make homosexuals feels comfortable.[/QUOTE]
Yes.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;47811384]Yes.[/QUOTE]
Alright, as long as there's consistency in that statement I have no qualms.
Though I would disagree with it on a moral basis (that is the general idea of making people feel comfortable to an extent, not anything specific).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
