Yeah, *totally *not trying to make a thing…:dubious:
Kimstu, you are right that it would be entirely hypocritical of me to take a stance of trying to suppress their speech. I guess what I’m trying to say is that we (mainstream Democrats) should treat their criticisms more like the ones that come from outside, rather than treating them as people with whom we are making common cause. Whatever votes we lose by telling them to please go ahead and fuck right off, I think we can more than make up from married white suburban women and that sort of centrist person, who is getting turned off by Republicans but is uneasy about joining a party she may fear is going to basically call her a white devil, or try to force her teenage daughter to shower after gym class with boys who still have penises but call themselves girls.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem is is that people cannot separate criticism from attacks. And not just those being criticized or defending the criticisms.
You have a person that says “I think this about this social issue.” Then you have someone else say, “Well, you didn’t mention this part of that social issue.” That’s perfectly fair, and the original author may agree with that criticism, disagree with it, or find it relevant to the thesis that they were exploring.
The problem is is that criticism is public. So you have people that jump on the criticism, and say, “This author doesn’t care about this part of that social issue, because he didn’t mention it in that essay.” Some of these criticisms come from well meaning, but poorly informed parts of your woke crowd, but some also comes from trolls who just like to attack people online, because it makes them feel good about themselves for whatever reason. It turns a moderate disagreement into what is perceived as an attack.
Now, it is a tiny number of people that are involved in this, and expecting every single person with an internet connection to not criticize your idols is an unrealistic goal. You need to seperate constructive criticism, "You could have made that point better if you had said this’…’ ", deconstructive criticism, "You’re conclusions on this point are incorrect because of ‘…’ ", and actual attacks, "You are a horrible human being for thinking that ‘…’ ". If you don’t, you end up defending against constructive criticism in the same manner in which you are fighting against actual attacks, and that doesn’t move the discussion forward.
Who are you denouncing again? Fictional fantasy people? Or me and my wife and lots of folks like us who have similar views and vote in every single election? Or some other group that you assert definitely exists and I should agree with you just because? Because the things you describe in this post sound like the views of no one I’ve ever met or spoken to, and perhaps only existing on the extreme fringes of twitter (and possibly mostly sourced from Russian troll farms).
Liberals tend to argue and disagree with other liberals quite frequently. This is a feature, not a bug. It’s a good thing. Intra-group criticism and challenge is generally a very good thing and leads to better ideas in the long run. If the possibility of being criticized by other liberals turns someone off, then they’re probably not cut out for a writing or punditry career.
I still can’t figure out two things:
-Who, exactly, you dislike. You describe a combination of fantasy views, reasonable criticism, total nonsense, and more, into some nebulous group you call TWC. Who the hell are these people? Can you name one, and summarize their views as to why they qualify as a “TWC”?
-What, exactly, you’re advocating for. That liberals not ever criticize or challenge other liberals? That they be “nice” about it? That those mysterious folks you call TWC should disappear or hide or form their own party?
:dubious: As part of the “we” you’re referencing here, I strongly disagree with your proposal to recruit middle-class moderates by encouraging them to believe that being called a “devil” is in any way comparable to allowing transgender teenagers to use the restroom/washroom facilities assigned to the gender they identify as.
If somewhat socially conservative parents think that teenagers ought to be allowed more bodily privacy at school, rather than being subjected to mandatory episodes of communal nudity rigidly segregated by genital configuration, I would be happy to support them in that mission. Even if one of their motivations is (in my view baseless) fear of teens being exposed to the bodies of their transgender classmates.
But that is a very far cry from directly encouraging socially conservative parents in that fear, or suggesting to them that such experiences are some kind of unjustifiable outrage on a par with somebody directly insulting you. Liberals can expand our constituency without jumping right on board the transphobia-paranoia train, thankyouverymuch.
(In any case, AFAICT a whole lot of teen girls today already have a transgender or nonbinary friend or cousin or know somebody who does, or follow a transgender vlogger on YouTube or something. Trans acceptance among the very young these days is not really the far-out leftist-extremist niche issue you’re making it out to be. I think your proposed recruitment demographic of white voters who remain uncompromisingly transphobic while simultaneously being receptive to liberal ideals in other respects is likely to be actually pretty small.)
This happened at a real Missouri high school, and even most of the girls who were broadly accepting of this transgender student wanted that person to simply accept the school’s offer of a single bathroom to change in rather than using either the girls’ or boys’ locker rooms. But the transgender person in question insisted on using the girls’ locker room, and the Obama Education Dept. (very unwisely IMO) backed them up.
I also think you are vastly underestimating how much of a silent majority agrees with me on this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So they wanted to be treated like every other kid and not stigmatized as an other? How horrible!
I think your understanding of the concept of “majority” needs a little work:
Looks like your understanding of what I said needs a little work. The people in that Missouri community had no problem with that student using whatever bathroom they wished. It was the locker rroom that was an issue. Big difference.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You’ll note that the story itself is almost comically tilted toward saying, essentially, “these people are all wrong”. That’s real helpful. :rolleyes:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
~hijack~ I do! I’ve been super intrigued with the progress videos he’s uploaded. Not so much interested in his versions of facebook or snapchat, since I don’t use those much. I’m hoping it’s not a bust like Ello which I got an early invite to. I believe AngryBlackLady was one of the first invites and I enjoy her voice.
But deliberately misgendering someone is just fine, and totally normal and acceptable, right? Those black folks should have been fine with separate water fountains and bathrooms. They were making people uncomfortable, after all!
Iiandy, it’s hilarious that you were just lecturing me about “whining”. Oh noes, someone has been “misgendered”! Whatever shall we do? That’s as bad as putting someone in chains and whipping them! :rolleyes:
This is exacty how you keep the GOP competitive when it would be so easy to wipe them out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LBJ lost the South for a generation (or more, very likely) because he (and the Democratic Party) fought for Civil Rights. It was still the right thing to do.
If you want to misgender people, go right ahead. You’ll just get rightfully shit on for it.
Awesome, let’s spend decades in the political wilderness, lose the opportunity to protect the environment, provide health care for the poor, etc., so we can stand firm on the principle that what 14 year old girls need is someone standing next to them in the shower sudsing “her” cock. Fanfuckingtastic plan.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You asked me upthread, BTW, to prove that TWC exist in any substantial way. Now you’re proving my point for me. Thanks for that at least!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you mean, “big difference”? According to your own cite, “the general sentiment” was that the community objected to the girl in question using the girls’ locker room and bathroom.
Looks like your own understanding of what you said needs a little work.
In any case, I repeat that according to polling data, there isn’t a majority, silent or otherwise, in favor of prohibiting transgender students from using the facilities for the gender they identify with. On the contrary, the majority opposes such prohibitions (even if this particular Missouri community happened to be in favor of them).
And I’m rather surprised that you as a self-proclaimed devotee of Millian liberalism are so resistant to referring to a transgender girl by the pronouns she prefers. What happened to allowing maximum liberty to individual freedom as long as it’s not harming others? What harm is her choice of pronouns doing to anybody else?
I didn’t know you had this problem with trans people, but I guess even your fantasies can be illuminating.
Keep on fighting these mostly fictional people (or maybe not, see below)!
So if someone fights for trans rights they’re TWC? Or just if they disagree with you? You still haven’t told me who these supposed TWC actually are.
If those are the requirements, then that’s getting to be a pretty huge bucket! But fight the good fight against all these people you hate!
Did you seriously just conflate iiandyiiii’s reference to Jim Crow segregation practices (“separate water fountains and bathrooms”) with practices of actual slavery (“putting someone in chains and whipping them”)?
If that’s the extent to which you have to distort another poster’s remarks in order to be even minimally successful at rebutting them, that should tell you something about the weakness of your argument.
No, actually enslaving black people is not reasonably comparable to misgendering and shunning transgender people (and contrary to what you’re trying to imply, nobody in this thread has suggested that it is).
But segregationist policies requiring black people to use separate facilities are arguably meaningfully comparable to misgendering and shunning transgender people. If a transgender girl brings her cock into the girls’ shower, it is not actually harming cisgender girls any more than a black girl bringing her dark skin into the girls’ shower actually harmed white girls.