|
A big flaming stink posted:https://twitter.com/sigridellis/status/1532340701026983937?t=nJMbZfRQ3hZ10AAgN_Mirg&s=19 "That means something." Yeah it means they think there's some money to be made and some free good publicity on offer from dipshits like this! loving calling yourself an "elder queer" like that means anything, you've just been a loving rube for a longer time! This poo poo drives me completely up the wall
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
More sinisterly it means that the NeoLiberal hawks have got a readymade excuse to invade any country who hasn't been given the space to develop past the homophobia that Colonialism imposed on them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
I think there's something to be said about treating corporate pride as a canary in a coal mine. Comparisions between 2019 and this year already show a decent size reduction in prevalence of corporations pushing pride. That does not mean that I think these corporations care even a single lick about our rights, but if they don't even see us as something viable to try and push sales toward then I don't see it looking good in the future. Basically, I don't like corporate pride but if it were to start regressing I would see it as a sign of things to come.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 22:55
|
|
|
I'm generally pro queer capitalism. I'd rather see it than NOT see it, anyway (I'm also more neoliberal than most of D&D, so this revelation is probably not news). You don't have to change your cell phone provider to the one that rainbows up their logo in June, but it's nice just to feel included. It also sends a message to middle-management that intolerance won't be supported. This might be something only olds remember but Denny's had to pay $54m in 1994's money to settle many many claims that black customers around the country were unwelcome; one of the bigger events being some of Clinton's Secret Service detail going to one and the whites being served right away. That kind of thing could be avoided if corporate told managers and directors that the company doesn't tolerate this poo poo. I'd rather see Disney make money selling rainbow mouse ears than go back twenty years when a representative was exasperatingly telling Bill O'Reilly that Gay Day At Magic Kingdom is some organizer's convention and not something the company can control or do anything about, or worse go back to the 70s when same-sex dance partners were outright bounced. Sometimes I think the zoomers (particularly outside of the states still hostile to LGBT people's right to exist) have been raised in the comfort of so much acceptance that they sacrifice too much to support the class war. In some people's lives, the pride flags at some big national chain outlet are the only pride flags in the whole town. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jun 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
I suppose one could say that it indicates something good - that enough people find this bigotry distasteful enough that the wealthy have to start paying attention. This doesn't mean we're obliged to support each big company who puts rainbow stripes on their stuff, any more than we're obliged to give an individual person a round of applause for realising that people don't like it when they're openly homophobic. They're reacting to societal attitudes, not leading the charge. Rainbows are delightful, though - I wouldn't blame someone for wanting rainbow coloured things. But try to go for independent/LGBTQ+ owned businesses for your ornamental rainbow tat if you can.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
Jollity Farm posted:This doesn't mean we're obliged to support each big company who puts rainbow stripes on their stuff That's the spirit. I bought pride month Oreos because I just wanted some drat Oreos at the time. (I also wouldn't bother paying more for them than a typical bag of Oreos, since they didn't even rainbow up the frosting, just replaced the name on the biscuit with 'PROUD'.) They at best get some manner of support for daring to not bow to the reactionaries; I get a thing I was going to buy anyway with the mild satisfaction that I am representing myself in a way I very rarely ever do because I'm not an activist, never been to Pride, and I'm introverted anyhow. I guess that's what I like about it: I'm a very passive sort of gay since I'm not out to most strangers I meet, and most people I'm out to remark that they never would have guessed. While it will upset certain types of quasi-Marxists, to a lot of people consumption is act of self-identity. This is why young people today will still have arguments about the big two video game consoles even though more games are released on both consoles than when I was their age. It also allows a company to see what sort of people they're courting. This year's Call of Duty pride month corporate acknowledgement tweet drew so much "ew dude gross" and vomit emojis from their most vocal customers that they disabled replies entirely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 00:54
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:That's the spirit. I bought pride month Oreos because I just wanted some drat Oreos at the time. (I also wouldn't bother paying more for them than a typical bag of Oreos, since they didn't even rainbow up the frosting, just replaced the name on the biscuit with 'PROUD'.) They at best get some manner of support for daring to not bow to the reactionaries; I get a thing I was going to buy anyway with the mild satisfaction that I am representing myself in a way I very rarely ever do because I'm not an activist, never been to Pride, and I'm introverted anyhow. I guess that's what I like about it: I'm a very passive sort of gay since I'm not out to most strangers I meet, and most people I'm out to remark that they never would have guessed. While it will upset certain types of quasi-Marxists, to a lot of people consumption is act of self-identity. This is why young people today will still have arguments about the big two video game consoles even though more games are released on both consoles than when I was their age. Of course while Nabisco were promoting the rainbow Oreos they were crushing union drives and forcing 12 hour days and unpaid weekend overtime on the people who make them so you're absolutely getting played for a rube there
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 01:03
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:Sometimes I think the zoomers (particularly outside of the states still hostile to LGBT people's right to exist) have been raised in the comfort of so much acceptance that they sacrifice too much to support the class war. In some people's lives, the pride flags at some big national chain outlet are the only pride flags in the whole town. I'm not sure what exactly you think they're sacrificing? It doesn't actually cost anything to maintain a healthy level of skepticism towards capital's coopting of pride for profit. Except the fuzzy feelings you get from supporting [brand], I guess, but if you're already opposed to capital in general then those aren't worth anything anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 02:32
|
|
|
The chud-o-sphere is currently abuzz with literal Nazi, self-described "theocratic fascist", and all-around vile sewage plant Matt Walsh's new "documentary" entitled What Is a Woman? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt20256528/ I'm not remotely in the headspace to watch it; from what I can tell, it's a Crowder-esque joint where the cretinous troglodyte host accosts random people and asks them a deeply philosophical, complex question. He then selectively edits the whole thing to Calm_Hitler.m4v, making himself and his position appear naturally correct and portraying his opponents as unhinged lunatics. The IMDB page is currently being review-bombed by exactly who you'd expect, and their "positive" reviews are pretty illuminating as to who the target audience is: virulent transphobes. That said, frankly, I'd probably struggle to come up with an answer to the titular question on the spot as well. After some thought, the most concise answer I could come up with was "an adult human who chooses to present with culturally-accepted feminine traits". While I doubt whether this would convince anyone who didn't already understand gender, I'm wondering what a better answer would be?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 02:45
|
|
|
forbidden dialectics posted:I'm not remotely in the headspace to watch it; You can absolutely just not. I can't imagine why you would think you need to? forbidden dialectics posted:That said, frankly, I'd probably struggle to come up with an answer to the titular question on the spot as well. After some thought, the most concise answer I could come up with was "an adult human who chooses to present with culturally-accepted feminine traits". While I doubt whether this would convince anyone who didn't already understand gender, I'm wondering what a better answer would be? Let's be real: if someone is trying to put you on the spot and asking that question to do so then the only correct answer is "I know what you're trying to do and it won't work on me, go gently caress yourself." No one without a terrible preexisting agenda is ever going to ask you what a woman is, it's a trap question every time it's deployed and the only rational response is to just never engage on their terms
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
forbidden dialectics posted:That said, frankly, I'd probably struggle to come up with an answer to the titular question on the spot as well. After some thought, the most concise answer I could come up with was "an adult human who chooses to present with culturally-accepted feminine traits". While I doubt whether this would convince anyone who didn't already understand gender, I'm wondering what a better answer would be? It's not a bad answer. But the trouble you're going to run into here is to even try to define it properly is a fairly complicated philosophical process that can't really be boiled down to a sound byte that sounds particularly convincing. By its very nature, that question requires you to lay a good bit of groundwork before you can even start to answer it properly. Which you obviously can't do with someone asking you gotcha questions on the spot who isn't interested in having an actual discussion on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:It's not a bad answer. But the trouble you're going to run into here is to even try to define it properly is a fairly complicated philosophical process that can't really be boiled down to a sound byte that sounds particularly convincing. By its very nature, that question requires you to lay a good bit of groundwork before you can even start to answer it properly. Which you obviously can't do with someone asking you gotcha questions on the spot who isn't interested in having an actual discussion on the subject. This kind of sounds like you lack confidence or training in your ideology if you can't come up with debate answers or convincing soundbitez on the spot
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 03:26
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:You can absolutely just not. I can't imagine why you would think you need to? I don't, it's just the most common first response the gormless freaks who consume this kind of media (e.g., my parents) generally ask: "well, did you even watch it?" some plague rats posted:the only correct answer is "I know what you're trying to do and it won't work on me, go gently caress yourself." I think this is actually the best approach, realistically. Can't-reason-someone-out-of-a-position-they-didn't-reason-themselves-into and all that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 03:31
|
|
|
forbidden dialectics posted:I don't, it's just the most common first response the gormless freaks who consume this kind of media (e.g., my parents) generally ask: "well, did you even watch it?" Just lie and say you did and it was hideously unconvincing, you already know what he's going to say it's not like there's a quiz at the end. Or just go on the offensive and say your won't watch it until they watch, I don't know, Nanette. They won't learn anything but at least they'll be miserable
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 04:05
|
|
|
Lance of Llanwyln posted:I mean, a certain meme comes to mind, where discussing gender with trans people is likened to a Socratic dialogue with Socrates himself, and discussing gender with cis people is likened to having a complex conversation with a toddler. I've had a number of fascinating discussions about the relationship between sex/physiological realities, gender identity and gender expression with trans people, especially with my non-binary friends, but it's pretty obvious it's something a lot of cis people never really think about or engage with in a meaningful way. I think it comes down to most cisgender people never having had to think deeply on what gender means to them, rather just going intuitively with what they feel fits them and the social expectations developed around it. It's one of those things that until you have a reason to really think about it, can be background noise. some plague rats posted:You can absolutely just not. I can't imagine why you would think you need to? I'd go with 'Your mother, presumably. Now get out of my face.'
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 05:11
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I'd go with 'Your mother, presumably. Now get out of my face.' I mean, that's sort of the exact issue that they think they're capitalizing on, isn't it? The person who gave birth to me, for instance, no longer identifies as a woman, and there are trans men capable of giving birth right now in the world, so the presumption is faulty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 06:09
|
|
|
El Fideo posted:I mean, that's sort of the exact issue that they think they're capitalizing on, isn't it? The person who gave birth to me, for instance, no longer identifies as a woman, and there are trans men capable of giving birth right now in the world, so the presumption is faulty. Yeah there's tons of nuances to the issue but as soon as you try and play by their rules you're on a hiding to nothing. Just get em out your way, pa
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 06:29
|
|
|
It's worth noting that if your talking to a far right person on camera, the best case scenario is that they edit you out. Like, if you utterly dunk on them, just completely prove them for fools, they won't show it. They'll cut you completely, or maliciously edit. If your having a conversation with your drunk transphobic uncle at Christmas dinner and they say "What IS a woman anyway!", then their is maybe room to argue (unless that argument is unsafe to have).
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 06:47
|
|
|
You could go as broad as "a featherless biped" and they'd say "aha! What about a one legged woman wearing a native headdress?" because they're not interested in actual discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 11:29
|
|
|
You are not, in fact, required to engage with every bit of grievance-driven media that the right wing grift-o-sphere produces. Given that “what is a woman” is at the heart of just about every Gender studies/Women’s studies 101, and that the boundaries of womanhood are extremely blurry, culturally specific, and fluid, I’d prepare myself for a hypothetical encounter with these people by doing a refresher on that material and then asking them lots of sincere and increasingly troubling questions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 11:44
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:You could go as broad as "a featherless biped" and they'd say "aha! What about a one legged woman wearing a native headdress?" because they're not interested in actual discussion. Actually Diogenes was right. Plato was a chump and poking holes in strict definitions is gender praxis. "A man is a fatherless biped" makes about as much sense as "A woman is when uterus."
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 11:52
|
|
|
They always end up going to something like "so I can just define myself as Chinese then?" rather than any honest criticism of definitions because the end goal is to poison the idea that people know who they are and the best way to find out is to ask them rather than to get the skull calipers out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 12:05
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:They always end up going to something like "so I can just define myself as Chinese then?" —A sense of nationality or ethnicity is actually more malleable. I have a lot of German heritage, but my closest immigrant relative was Scottish and I have a connection. People move to other places and identify as that being what defines them. The United States was a country that the founders just made up. —Race is actually more malleable when you get out of just white people. But the big difference between race in the American sense in which it exists in reference to whiteness is that it’s not a human constant. We still have a lot to learn about gender identity, but it seems like it’s part of human development. And there really isn’t an example of a culture in which humans didn’t develop gender constructs. That’s not true for race. A person who pretends to be Black is making a choice while a trans person is not because as important as race is in the reality of our lives, it doesn’t have to be a part of your being. Regarding Walsh and the Daily Wire’s bullshit, I think terrifying news story from Ohio should be kept in mind because this is the endpoint for people like Matt Walsh and their logic. The short version is it’s a trans sports ban that requires anyone who is suspected of being trans to have their genitals inspected which is horrifying. I live in a semi-rural town in North Carolina. Yesterday a burger place cashier called me ma’am. Maybe I looked pretty and was passing: maybe he was just being polite. Regardless I doubt he was thinking “Does this person have a vulva?” because he’s not a loving weirdo. People like Matt Walsh are loving weirdos alternatively cosplaying as normal or smart people. There are normal rear end people who are transphobic whose hearts and minds can be changed and need to be changed. Don’t waste your time on these dweebs. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Jun 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 15:25
|
|
|
My response to "how would you define a woman?" is "I wouldn't."
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
A lot of dumb goons ITT and not maliciously so just naive If you are asked these sorts of gotchas and it isn't someone you know personally then you never ever answer unless you are explicitly media trained. Not trained in gender studies, not trained in whatever else related to a different similarly bullshit gotcha, media training. You shut the question down and refuse to play to their framing. If you accept their framing you have already lost. You are never going to convince the person asking you, like the person asking you will not be convinced by you. It's all about the audience and how it plays to that audience and if you are not media trained you will gently caress it up. Never talk to media, never talk to tiktok dipshits at events, never EVER go on tv for any cause unless you have media training. "I know what you are trying to do and I'm not interested in this silly game" and walking away or something with that same message is the only correct answer. Unless you are media trained. It is their job to make you look stupid. You will not win, you will not look good no matter what you do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 11:26
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think this part is actually easy to answer though: So I can just decide to be black then? You just lost Timeless Appeal posted:—Race is actually more malleable when you get out of just white people. But the big difference between race in the American sense in which it exists in reference to whiteness is that it’s not a human constant. We still have a lot to learn about gender identity, but it seems like it’s part of human development. And there really isn’t an example of a culture in which humans didn’t develop gender constructs. That’s not true for race. A person who pretends to be Black is making a choice while a trans person is not because as important as race is in the reality of our lives, it doesn’t have to be a part of your being. But they are choosing they could just be their agab. You just lost never engage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 11:31
|
|
|
Miss Broccoli posted:So I can just decide to be black then? You just lost But I do find it interesting how some elements of identity are essentially constants and what parts of identity can be important but aren’t universal. I was posting in response to that because I think it’s interesting conversation. Also, not everyone is in positions where we can as easily opt out of these conversations, but like I said, I think most normal people in everyday life are willing to listen even if they hold transphobic beliefs because they’re being honest and not charlatans trying to capitalize on hatred.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 13:46
|
|
|
Jollity Farm posted:My response to "how would you define a woman?" is "I wouldn't." If Matt Walsh asks me, then the answer is “your mom last night in my bed”. I am not kidding, this is a serious post. Just like Miss Broccoli said, that discussion is not in good faith. Don’t legitimize it by giving it the time of day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 15:31
|
|
|
If a right-wing provocateur tries to film you, open a Disney music video on your phone and start playing at maximum volume. They'll never be able to post that recording anywhere without copyright bots shooting it down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
Which module of media training covers “telling people they are dumb in order to begin their education”?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 17:14
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:Which module of media training covers “telling people they are dumb in order to begin their education”? the first one obviously
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:Which module of media training covers “telling people they are dumb in order to begin their education”? I mean, it's quite obvious that some folks are not going to be honest interlocutors of what you are saying. Part of media is managing bad faith and cranks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2022 07:48
|
|
|
BEEEP BEEP BEEP Queer News... New Pew Research on trans folks... Highlights: --Basically 5% of young adults--Under 30--are gender noncomforming --The majority, 3% are nonbinary --Over 4 out 10 Americans personally know someone who is gender nonconforming --1/4 of Americans personally know someone using they/them pronouns --This is all dependent on age if the likelihood of even being fully aware of gender nonconforming identities going down with age (12% of people 65 or older know what nonbinary is). I kinda see the upswing and downswing of this. One it's great people are living their truth, and the reality is that our existence is unavoidable. Two, more people will know us, know we're normal people, and push back on grotesque laws against us. Downside is the the large number 5% is going to be used a scare tactic for the short-term.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2022 02:54
|
|
|
If you and yours live in Idaho, this Saturday there is a far right militia planning on having a confrontation at pride https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbtUdNAVYw&t=34s  Please be safe
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2022 08:18
|
|
|
Oh gee, there's that 'grooming' narrative again from so-called Christians. This poo poo is going to end in someone getting shot at, same as the whole Pizzagate bullshit where the foaming at the mouth conservatives got themselves all whipped up over their fantasies and attacked a restaurant. Also gotta love the bit at the bottom where these lovely folks play the 'if these media orgs don't platform is, take it as evidence that all our baseless accusations are true' game. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 12:00 on Jun 8, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2022 11:56
|
|
|
Look at the upload date on the video too btw. Apparently at that even there were sitting Republicans?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2022 12:06
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Oh gee, there's that 'grooming' narrative again from so-called Christians. It's really sad how utterly predictable the conservative moral panic cycle is in this country. The panic about trans kids being "groomed" is different from the Satanic Panic about "satanic ritual abuse" in daycares and murderous D&D games in the precise details but the shape of the thing is the same every drat time, right down to the preventable harm it's causing and going to cause to vulnerable kids and to adults who are just trying to do their jobs. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2022 14:08
|
|
|
It's always projection. The Satanic Panic was at least in part about covering for organized religious child abuse with "no actually it's secret satanists that nobody but us knows exists", then when investigations like the Ryan Report showed that, no, it was actually the churches themselves it turned into transparent bullshit like "we allowed gay priests as long as they were abstinent and then children were abused and we had to cover it up". Same thing happened a few years back with Poland going all in on 'LGBT Free Zones' to distract from the documentary Tell No One, and is happening now with 'grooming agendas' conveniently happening at the same time as the investigation into the Southern Baptist Convention.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2022 14:17
|
|
|
Yep, and far too often the more fire and brimstone the GOP politician is in describing the sexual sins, the better the chance he or one of his buddies is into whatever he's accusing others of.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2022 12:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Guavanaut posted:It's always projection. The Satanic Panic was at least in part about covering for organized religious child abuse with "no actually it's secret satanists that nobody but us knows exists", then when investigations like the Ryan Report showed that, no, it was actually the churches themselves it turned into transparent bullshit like "we allowed gay priests as long as they were abstinent and then children were abused and we had to cover it up". Imo, the satanic panic was mainly due to the emergence of evangelical Christians as a political bloc coinciding roughly with stagflation, the entry of heavy metal into the mainstream, and the rise of pen and paper role-playing games, which to a fundie pretty much looks like a combination of gambling and devil worship. So basically these people who were already convinced that it fell to them to stop society's fabric from unraveling found themselves in a target rich environment. Like, imagine you're a deranged fanatic, forced back into the workforce by stagflation and feeling guilty about leaving your child with strangers. You pick your kid up from daycare and he starts telling you how he spent the day rolling dice and pretending to be a worshipper of Asmodeus, instigated by a long haired weirdo in a Venom t-shirt. It takes zero additional steps to get to "this facility is exposing my child to devilry." The real wacky poo poo happens when a dumbass cop investigating an accusation questions a child who has no idea what's going on but picks up very quickly that their truthful answers aren't what the cop wants to hear. So they try to give the "right" answers, and next thing you know the official police report says that the kid was forced to take part in animal sacrifices after being flushed down the toilet. This actually happened. I think treating the panic as projection by religious conservatives or some kind of orchestrated distraction paints child abuse as specifically a religious or right wing problem rather than the inevitable result of any deeply hierarchical organization putting adults in positions where they have power over children without oversight that actually gives a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2022 15:24
|
|
