I’ve noticed in recent years that everything seems to be becoming dramatically more polarized, and I’m being expected to “pick a side” more and more.
I mean, it’s not like someone can have a middle of the road position on something controversial anymore- it’s got to be all-in on whatever the position is. Like I can’t have a position that generally thinks that cash bail isn’t the unmitigated evil that some on the Left think it is, without being tarred with accusations of racism and classism. Or I can’t think that EVs aren’t quite there yet, and that it’s a reasonable and normal thing at the present for people to be skeptical, or that their arguments against them are valid, without being thought of as a shill for Exxon or something.
Whether it’s here, Reddit, or real-life, it seems to me that this pressure to “pick sides” is becoming greater and greater - you have to buy into one side or the other’s entire belief system, or risk being associated with the other side.
Which is unmitigated bullshit, if you ask me. There’s no reason someone has to hold with the beliefs of either side of the socio-political spectrum. Middle views are perfectly reasonable, and this idea that if you’re not with us, you’re against us is toxic from either side of the spectrum.
So how do we stop this socio-political polarization? I’m really tired of being expected to believe things that I don’t, and being lumped in with one side or the other if I don’t.
It’s hard to reason with someone who belongs to a cult. Millions of Americans have joined a societal/political cult that is all or nothing. Either you are 100% MAGA, or you’re not. Pick a side. There is no middle ground. That didn’t exist before the 2016 election, and won’t be changing anytime soon as far a I can see. That doesn’t mean you have to be all or nothing.
It’s not just MAGA types who I’m talking about. In fact, it’s rarely that type who I interact with. It’s more this idea that we have to be 100% unambiguously on board with the progressive view on things, or we’re viewed as a MAGA type that frustrates me.
To use a hypothetical example, if a college shotputter were to suddenly declare that he’s now a trans woman and wants to continue to compete as a shotputter, the expected thing is that we’d accept her as a woman and let her continue to compete.
I absolutely agree with the first part of that- let people identify however they want, and respect that choice by treating them accordingly. But I don’t agree with the second- the physiological differences between biological men and biological women are too stark in shot put to make it remotely reasonable or fair for our hypothetical shotputter to compete as a woman.
I’m expecting someone will pillory me for not being 100% on board with this, and call me a transphobe and a bunch of other ugly names. Which is exactly what I’m talking about- there aren’t any middle positions.
As WhatExit said, this thread shall remain locked. The initial question might have led to an interesting discussion but that hypothetical derails it into trans issues and trans sports issues.
There are other threads specifically about trans issues in sports, if you look. If you want to have a discussion about polarization that is not about trans issues, you can try again. If you want to rant about all of it and this, that, the other things, and the kitchen sink, maybe try the Pit. Miller looks bored, anyway.