There are more of us than there are of them

Status
Not open for further replies.
Verbally abusing people is not a very effective way to get them to further consider your plight. Ignoring reality/rate statistics when waving around a victim card isn't very endearing either. Even if the goal is something other than being endearing, trying to shout down other thoughts won't progress a discussion.

More broadly, the tendency for elements of the Democratic party to engage in this kind of rhetoric is self destructive. Declaring people enemies tends to make them take the other side, even if they otherwise wouldn't take the other side. Maybe they even disagree with the other side, but hey at least they're not openly/directly hostile.
 
Ah yes, truly i should couch my words in more diplomatic terms lest i put off the people who already think my issues are worthy of dismissing, because as we all know, appeasement of these people have always turned out well, especially for transpeople.

I know your kind, you placate us. You tell us we will get our turn and then what? In 10 years time? 20 years? After I've suffered from things that could have been easily prevented if i wasn't who i am.

It's not good enough, you cannot put someones life, liberty, basic rights and dignity on a timetable and not expect them to get pissed off when the waiting list increases time and time again.
 
Declaring people enemies tends to make them take the other side, even if they otherwise wouldn't take the other side.

"Be nice to me or I'll take sides with the people denying you human dignity and equal participation in society" is a position that, er, reflects poorly on those who take it...
 
I know your kind, you placate us. You tell us we will get our turn and then what? In 10 years time? 20 years? After I've suffered from things that could have been easily prevented if i wasn't who i am.

I don't give a crap about appeasement, but you're not the only person who has suffered massively from things that could have been prevented, things that were beyond your control. The world is full of people who've been screwed like that, including some of the people you're willing to blanket as "privileged".

I'm not sure what basic rights/liberties you think you should have but don't. Focusing on these specifically would be more useful than vitriol.

"Be nice to me or I'll take sides with the people denying you human dignity and equal participation in society" is a position that, er, reflects poorly on those who take it...

Being a jerk reflects poorly too. I see no reason anybody should be particularly inclined to help someone who's actively hostile to them. Fortunately, an anecdote is not a representative sample.
 
I don't give a crap about appeasement, but you're not the only person who has suffered massively from things that could have been prevented, things that were beyond your control. The world is full of people who've been screwed like that, including some of the people you're willing to blanket as "privileged".

I'm not sure what basic rights/liberties you think you should have but don't. Focusing on these specifically would be more useful than vitriol.

No, i just have people like yourself, Narz, Zaardner, Yeekim, who like to opine about how i'm dividing people when i stand up for my rights, with the implication being that maybe i should quieten down lest i offend the delicate majority.

I'm not sure what basic rights/liberties you think you should have but don't. Focusing on these specifically would be more useful than vitriol.

No offense but i wouldn't expect you, of all people, to have any sort of knowledge about the issues transpeople face, but if you do want to, maybe ask them. Go into their communities, but don't be so quick to dismiss them as you have been in the past, maybe then you'll understand. I don't have time nor the patience to educate people who aren't operating in good faith, who put forth arguments designed to stymie any progress, who're against social shaming and change, one of the very few tactics we have.

When you defended deadnaming, you showed me who you are and i listened, no one who can defend that has my interests in mind or cares much for the transcommunity when that is a big issue in it. I hesitate to even call you neutral, you're functionally no better than the people from the opposite side who hate me, you just try to couch it in logic and other euphemisms.
 
"Be nice to me or I'll take sides with the people denying you human dignity and equal participation in society" is a position that, er, reflects poorly on those who take it...

The cruelty is the point my friend, we should be cowed into subservience and when we dare complain we should be quiet, even though we've been promised umpteen times and umpteen times let down. We are in the wrong, not people like Team who think we should just shut up and take whats coming, not people like Yeekim, Narz or Zaardner who openly posit that our issues are distracting from the "real problems" and then respond in faux-outrage when the absurdity and inhumanity of that is pointed out to them.
 
No, i just have people like yourself, Narz, Zaardner, Yeekim, who like to opine about how i'm dividing people when i stand up for my rights, with the implication being that maybe i should quieten down lest i offend the delicate majority.

Tell me, exactly what rights are those that you demand and we who do not think too much about it allegedly threaten?
I've crosse paths with a few trans people here, that I know of, and probably more without even being aware, and din't see them threatened in any way. Perhaps there it is different. But don't expect the rest of the world to join you in some battle just because you say so. And to not insult or attack people elsewhere who simply have nothing whatsoever to do with your troubles.

I'm not saying that you don't have problems there. In fact I'm even curious about them. I'm saying that you cannot expect other people to back you just because. You're not special, you're just like anyone else who pursues political aims. You have to persuade other people in order to gain backing.
 
Last edited:
No, i just have people like yourself, Narz, Zaardner, Yeekim, who like to opine about how i'm dividing people when i stand up for my rights, with the implication being that maybe i should quieten down lest i offend the delicate majority.

Methods matter. One could stand up for their rights via pushing legislation. One could also stand up for their rights by detonating nuclear bombs. One of these options is obviously preferable, but they both can fit the concept "standing up for rights".

Open hostility is divisive. But don't worry, I won't extend my subjective response to people who are not hostile.

No offense but i wouldn't expect you, of all people, to have any sort of knowledge about the issues transpeople face, but if you do want to, maybe ask them.

Just as you don't know issues others face, be they psychological issues, crippling medical issues, etc. I do know that the only other trans person I know is not openly hostile to so many people in general, however, and seems to have a better subjective experience (per her own words) than you describe.

When you defended deadnaming

I did not "defend deadnaming". Go ahead and dig up that thread again and fully quote whichever post you think "defended deadnaming".

You've crossed the line into outright lying. Last time I requested you show this, you didn't. Now you lie again.

you showed me who you are and i listened

Apparently not.

I hesitate to even call you neutral, you're functionally no better than the people from the opposite side who hate me, you just try to couch it in logic and other euphemisms.

I dislike hostility, lying, and rejecting reality. I otherwise wouldn't care one way or the other wrt anonymous people on the internet. You can complain or even push policy without hostility. If you expect success, that's probably the only angle that will see it.

Tell me, exactly what rights are those that you demand and we who do not think too much about it allegedly threaten?

Yes, lost in this discussion is that this question has already been asked, and unanswered, more than once across multiple threads.
 
I'm not interested in playing your little game of semantics and dissecting everything, transpeople evidently face discrimination even if the law claims otherwise why else would so many other transpeople report similar experiences? Or do they not count?

Do I need to point out the rate of suicide and self harm, that transpeople are under represented in society as a whole and have been relegated to being freaks for the majority to gawk at?

That somehow the right to live a life unencumbered by bigotry is an unreasonable demand, to not have your property damaged by others for characteristics you did not choose, to not have the crimes committed against you dismissed casually by the few institutions that are supposed to help me.

But it's ok, you want to play the semantic game but we both know that laws and the actual enforcement of said laws are two different matters, as African Americans know as well.
 
Liberals in the USA vs conservatives, that is.

Lexicus got it last time.

We have a fundamental problem on the broader left in the USA which is squeamishness. Y’all got to put that aside for this plan to work.

We are very affected by the people we spend time with. If we adopt conservatives into our friend groups they will be moved. So will we, but there’s more of us, so they’ll be moved more, and that’s more important since electorally they have a minority advantage given the federalist system so we need to move them a lot for very basic and not even very left wing changes need to be made (climate, tax code, industry reregulation, government programs etc)

I have another piece of this equation which involves us buying armalites but we’ll save that for another thread.

It’s time to save America, liberals, and make the ultimate sacrifice and hang out with right wingers. Just bring a friend.

I really hate to burst your bubble, but the Neo-Manichaean, binary, simplistic, us-and-them, right vs. left as solid, unified, lockstep blocs myth - which this theory so heavily depends on, like many other socio-political theories promoted so very often - is just that - a myth. Just because a nation has a broken, anachronistic, distorting, and corrupt - even somewhat rigged - electoral system that force all power, artificially, into two political parties, that aren't REALLY even true political parties by others nations' standards, but are awkwardly forced coalitions that are made up of a bunch of ideological camps that are dysfunctional in their attempt to productively cooperate and are tearing these contrived coalitions apart at the seams - as can be seen in every contested primary cycle - does not even remotely make this myth close to true.
 
If you're going to imply that my very real, very pressing issues are an excuse and that i am, by proxy, aiding and abetting that then don't be so shocked when i tell you to go do one okay?

My community has been ignored and what you and Mr Zaardner are claiming is that because of the very brief stint in current history where we're actually beginning to get recognition of our problems and grievances that we're somehow subtracting/distracting from the "real issues" (last time i heard getting killed because you are trans is a pretty big ****ing issue) is at best crass and deeply offensive and at worst the same sort of logic used bigots to keep us down.

Your little thoughtless salvo destroyed any attempt at developing a fruitful discussion when you came out with:

"I can't shake the feeling that a lot of minority issues are deliberately fanned up to distract attention from the fact that a handful of people own like half of the world.
Yes, I know, white hetero male privilege speaking. But still..."

Like how the hell would you know? People are dying, people are being killed, people are having their rights, their very lives taken away and you want to sit there, in your little armchair and pontificate about how it's being "fanned up to distract attention from the fact that a handful of people own like half of the world." like give me a goddamn break okay? And then you respond like you're somehow being mistreated because people are taking you to task over your little spiel.

When you face being fired from your job because you are cis, face being denied healthcare because of puritanical bs, when you face being attacked on the basis of who you are, then come back to me because right now all i'm hearing is the priviledged murmurings of a man who has yet to confront the fact that not everything revolves around him, you can either join the line and wait for people to grant you your dignity, humanity and rights, join me in demanding them for all of us or just do what you're doing right now and see how well that goes for you.
Sigh.
I did not say minority issues are a distraction, period. I said that a lot of them are being fanned up to distract.
And I asked you a simple question, which you for some reason totally ignored even though you found time to type a long angry tirade at me.

Yes, getting killed because you are trans is a "pretty ******* big issue". Being fired because you are trans is a big issue. Being denied healthcare more so.
Every one of them would also be criminal or illegal both here and - I think at least? - in US. I doubt you'll find anyone here willing to defend anything like this. I'm not sure who am I to "demand" anything from in that regard?

However, when I think of trans issues as reported in mainstream media, or indeed, debated on CFC, they don't include "people being killed for their sexuality" ... probably because there would not be much to discuss. Everyone agrees it is awful.
They revolve around wokest manner of pronoun use and legislatures debating who is to use which bathroom. This paints the picture of the minority in question as being generally unreasonable, entitled weirdos, who apparently have it so good they don't have any serious problems left. It is divisive and seemingly contributes towards the hatred that finds its extreme manifestation in atrocities you mention, as certain less bright people are being led to believe LGBT elites are bent on forcing their ways on everyone else or whatever other nonsense is being fed to them. This kind of agenda-setting does not appear to do the minority in question any favors and I suspect is not entirely their own doing.
That is what I meant by saying "stuff being deliberately fanned up as a distraction". That is also why I asked if you've come to notice/suspect anything like that.

Now, to repeat the obvious, lest you again misunderstand me - yes, sure, discrimination is not solved and done away with simply by making it illegal. Bigotry still exists and needs to be tackled. But neither I nor anyone else can make anyone else like or accept you. Only you can do that by being, well, likeable. There's no risk to your personal safety involved on Internet either.
There are LGBT people both on CFC and IRL who've done more [EDIT: than any public lobby group, demonstration or columnist] to raise my goodwill towards their community simply by being reasonable, polite and well spoken on a range of issues not necessarily having anything to with LGBT at all.
 
Last edited:
that transpeople are under represented in society as a whole and have been relegated to being freaks for the majority to gawk at?

Make up your mind. Either they are "underrepresented", effectively invisible, unnoticed. Or they are looked at as freaks, very much noticed? They cannot be both. What do you wish? To be treated exactly as everyone else, to not be regarded socially as someone out of the ordinary, or to be "represented", granted some special status because of being different somehow?
 
@Yeekim

You do understand that reducing misgendering to "wokest manner of pronoun use" is exactly the thing that folks might be annoyed about? Perhaps? If you already buy into a conservative reading on an angle of marginalisation, don't act surprised when people take those words at their meaning. I understand it was an example, by the by. But I also think people really need to consider context when invoking words like "woke".

It's also disappointing to see anger used as a way to delegitimise peoples' points. Someone can be angry and right. Someone can be polite and wrong. You can't dismiss things as being angry tirades on that point alone without making some rather grandiose assumptions.

You have people who have been nice to you, that's incredibly lucky (and to a word, privileged). But you can't expect every single marginalised person to act the same. They're not some kind of singular compound entity. Folks like Cloud (and others) see their existences and identities reduced to some kind of online debate literally daily. You cannot decide what their response should be. Painting being "likeable" as their sole responsibility, instead of putting the burden on yourself and others to improve is a even worse set of optics. It demonstrates that you don't understand why they're being hostile, so at this point I kinda have to ask you why?

People who want an excuse to paint a marginalised demographic as irrational based on displays of emotion will always find a way too. Why? Because they're already acting in bad faith. These individuals aren't going to stop. I believe the better way to handle that is to call out that disingenuity for what it is. Like I said earlier: someone can be angry, and still be right. People misusing that to misrepresent the people who are angry are the ones who should be called on such.

@innonimatu

lmao. Nobody needs to make up their mind if you don't understand the words being used.
 
What's with this disengenuous bull man?

You can be underrepresented in society and still be the laughing joke in it, do I need to remind you that for decades transpeople were treated like freaks? It in no way precludes you from being marginalised and it's the height of arrogance and privilege to assume so.

How quick you forget things eh? That it wasn't that long ago that transpeople were literally billed as freaks to mock in tv or film or in games, how easily that slipped your mind. Give me a break, you're no different than all the other's, you try to hide your antipathy, your casual indifference to our problems but you make no effort to understand our problems and you even go so far as to claim we're demanding unreasonable things like basic dignity.

I see through you, like I've seen through the others. I don't dislike you or them, I just know that you won't ever care until it personally impacts upon you.

You don't get to debate the dignity of human beings without shedding some of your humanity and this is the price you must pay for your personal ideology, I pay it aswell but at least I'm upfront about it and admit my sin.

When you treat whether or not I should be able to live a life free of the **** I have as some sort of topic worthy of anything other than a firm "yes" you are entertaining a seriously dangerous idea that has very bad consequences for me and you have no right to ask me to be civil in response to that.

I don't care how you try to word it, it's not a negotiation there is no leeway.

All of you forget this isn't some hypothetical there are real world consequences to the attitudes I've seen displayed in this forum and it genuinely has me worried about the lack of empathy; if I displayed the same attitude towards you and yours you would call me a sociopath.
 
Last edited:
transpeople are under represented in society as a whole

Are they though? Most estimates put the total trans population at less than one percent of the total population. So it seems perfectly reasonable that there are no trans officials in government. Also considering that you are less than one percent of the population, the recent influx of trans characters in television and trans personalities in pop culture in general would suggest that trans people are overrepresented in current pop culture.

So again, exactly what do you mean by your statement that trans people are underrepresented in society?
 
Are they though? Most estimates put the total trans population at less than one percent of the total population. So it seems perfectly reasonable that there are no trans officials in government. Also considering that you are less than one percent of the population, the recent influx of trans characters in television and trans personalities in pop culture in general would suggest that trans people are overrepresented in current pop culture.

So again, exactly what do you mean by your statement that trans people are underrepresented in society?
Assuming for the sake of charity whatever estimate you're using is vaguely correct, I have a few followups.

1. Given that the executive branch of the US government alone employs roughly 5,000,000 people, do you have evidence to support any amount of marginalised demographics represented fairly in this body?
2. Given that the intent of media is to present a story, and often stories that are unfamiliar to the viewer (not a hard and fast rule, there's a lot of enjoyment to be had in popular historical representation, but that's a rather specific genre), why shouldn't there be an uneven weighting of stories portrayed? Surely, if balanced out across the history of television, this "influx" as you're describing it is simply correcting the historical scale?
3. Why is another thread being hijacked by cis folks asking trans folks to justify the extent of their marginalisation? The original point came out of a weird claim a presumably-cis person made about minority issues as a whole. It seems odd to reduce this to challenging a known poster to keep proving things that you could just as easily Google.
 
@Gorbles
Righteous anger sure has its place. I just don't think it needs to be made personal and directed at me, based on an erroneous and rather uncharitable interpretation of my posts, no less.

I don't decide what anyone's response should be. After all, I'm not the one with an issue of being unliked and marginalized. I'm offering my perspective and advice, free to listen or to ignore. And if I didn't at least somewhat understand why Cloud seems to be perpetually angry at everything and anything, I might be less patient with his habitual personal attacks as well.

Finally, if you say there are people who misrepresent marginalized demographics in bad faith, does that mean you agree with my original post?
 
@Gorbles
Righteous anger sure has its place. I just don't think it needs to be made personal and directed at me, based on an erroneous and rather uncharitable interpretation of my posts, no less.

I don't decide what anyone's response should be. After all, I'm not the one with an issue of being unliked and marginalized. I'm offering my perspective and advice, free to listen or to ignore. And if I didn't at least somewhat understand why Cloud seems to be perpetually angry at everything and anything, I might be less patient with his habitual personal attacks as well.

Finally, if you say there are people who misrepresent marginalized demographics in bad faith, does that mean you agree with my original post?
You don't think it needs to be directed at you, cool. Marginalised minorities would, I assume, not think that their lives need to be subject to an excessive amount of debate just to be afforded the same kind of leeway non-marginalised folks do. Look past the anger. You talk about what needs to be done - that is a thing that needs to be done. Respect for the plight of marginalised people shouldn't depend on how rude people can be to you - they have an inherently different life experience to you and you can't expect them to not react badly solely because you don't think whatever was said wasn't that bad.

You need to understand the impact marginalisation has on a person. Using the amount of times you've been insulted as some kind of litmus test for your patience is again, making it seem like your virtue, rather than your understanding of the actual disparty in society at large, is the condition for your support.

I don't agree with your original post because I don't agree that they're being "fanned up". To me that reads as being exaggerated. Minority issues are not exaggerated - they're repeatedly dismissed or lumped in with other (often racist) conspiracy theories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom