@Buddha
>Thanks for taking the time to read not even half my post.
>For someone saying the point flew over my head, you're awfully far from my actual point, but like I said, brick wall. Enjoy your echo chamber.
Tip for the future-- don't call resort to calling people morons or stupid if you'd like to have an actual discourse with them-- It has nothing to do with wanting to exist in some echo chamber, believe me. I actually enjoy discussing things like this with people who have different opinions, but if you're going to insult my intelligence because I pointed out the problematic nature of something YOU said, then I'll happily fuck off.
Dear mrs. I'm black so I decide what's black and what's not.
If you're gonna berate me for calling you a moron, despite the fact that you were trying your absolute hardest to out-meme me while providing no actual sources or info (protip: the idea that ingroup bias was overcome in the blue eyes-brown eyes experiment is false, it was actually proven to be reinforced in that experiment. I know this because I studied this. If you want to know how to overcome ingroup bias I can upload some powerpoints and articles for you to read so that you can figure out what the deal is with in group bias.
In group bias is overcome through multiple complex things that are required (such as having things in common, and conversation). Most of these requirements are not met by either the other races or the blacks. Or the hetero's and the LGBTQ+* whatever)).
Furthermore, maybe calling me an Uncle Tom, a slave owner or implying I'm a racist wasn't the
best way to prove your point. And no it wasn't race baiting, because that'd imply I somehow care if you think I'm a racist. I'd just prefer if you openly called me a racist. I know I'm not a racist, my black friends from the Carribean know I'm not a racist (I mean, they've told me blacks from America hate Carribeans more than white people do, but that's just anecdotal.) and so I feel comfortable with my friends and myself. I don't fear being called a racist, I'll just own the label.
> Tip for the future; don't call people uncle Tom's, slave owners or try to tell them they're racist. It doesn't help your point, and it stops discourse.
(See how that works.)... whatever your point was. Your point got lost in your stupid attempt to out-meme me and I still have no idea what the fuck you were trying to tell me outside of the blue eyes-brown eyes thing, which didn't really disprove in group bias.
So, you're the pot calling the kettle black here. 'You called me a moron!' Yes because you called me an uncle Tom, lmao. Just because I'm outspoken means I'm an uncle Tom?
So you are aware of the parallels-- it's fair enough if you believe that they require two completely different solutions, but reality is never that clean cut. We need to strive toward the most practical and most utopian solutions for things like this, and I feel many of these solutions are going to result in overlap. I will admit my fault in race baiting though-- the parallels were simply too easy to point out and I knew they'd illicit an emotional response.
First off, as I said above, I don't care about race baiting, you can call me a racist, it wouldn't help you to further your point. Besides that, I think you're overestimating the 'emotional' response. I called you a moron because you thought that implying I'm a racist somehow proved..
a point. I'm still not sure what point. I didn't react emotionally, I reacted by calling you a moron. I don't know what emotion I'd put into that, lol. Anger? I'm not gonna be upset by some black queer woman that is an ocean across from me, who I have no emotional attachment to. Please.
Besides, I'm an Uncle Tom now, so I'll just do what the whites do, right. I'll pretend racism is the worst thing on the world right now, ooooo shock, racism! People are racist, so unexpected, it's not like racism is innate caveman biology that is still active today because humans are animals! No. It doesn't work like that, I like to think I'm a bit smarter than that and I'd like to think you are too, so perhaps we could discuss solutions to this problem, not the problem itself, because anyone with half a brain can see that there's a problem in the USA.
Which isn't even where I live.
Yes. I am aware of the parallels. I am not stupid.
For someone that preaches practical and 'utopian' solutions for things like this, I feel like the movements you stand for (I mean, the 'open movements' you stand for/stand in line with. Anyone can speak for these movements which is part of the problem.) often don't talk about solutions but about problems.
Blacks face this.
Homosexuals face this.
There's never a 'how do we deal with 'this' in this scenario'.
In fact I was gonna point this out as perhaps the reason we didn't get along. I am thinking about solutions. LGBT pride parades are not a solution. In fact they probably drive a further wedge between hetero's and LGBT people. Hence I am against them.
I feel it's important to point out however that I am not saying I am against LGBT's. I am as much against hetero pride as you are (it's nonpractical and doesn't fix anything, therefore not required in public space). You seemed to think I hate black people and gays, but in fact I hate white people and hetero's just as much.
I just want people to act normal -> your next point.
So, back to the topic-- your whole argument is flawed because you're implying there's some "common sense" way for people to act. Common sense, shouldn't be relied upon in logic-- it's ultimately based on assumptions, social acceptance and no facts.
Yes. And social norms exist for a reason. Assumptions are a biological process that, again, has to do with the 'tribe'. Facts are subjective in all social situations because there is no facts about anything that has to do with human input. Given that you know a bunch of stuff about sociology I'll take it you will or have already figured out exactly why sociology is a shit-poor example of a 'science' because there's nothing exact about sociology and criminology.
So, yes, the argument is flawed, but in my eyes it's the best argument there is. There are social norms, and LGBT prides often over go those social norms and then they are surprised when people dislike it.
Like, define "normal" without relying on synonyms, or implying that heterosexuality is a norm we should all abide by, or the strawman that "sexuality in public is bad" because guarantee you the only studies you're going to find show that teaching kids about sex at a younger age is better for them-- it's another argument for another time.
Normal is just whatever the majority is. And I am not implying heterosexuality is the norm, I'm talking about behavior. Which means going to the gay pride wearing a shirt and having a beer, not going to the gay pride dressed like a half naked man to get weirdly sexual in public. Which does happen. I mean, like I said 2x before, 1 google image search for 'gay pride' will show you that and I'm sure we could enhance that search with 'sexual' behind it.
Teaching kids about sex at a younger age is better for them. Which is why my country does that. I mean, I'm not sure if you know where I live despite mentioning it a few times, but I'm Dutch. From the Netherlands. Amsterdam. Haha-weed, wooden shoes and windmills. We were the first country to ever legalize gay marriage. Our hate crime numbers (read: hate crime, not crime against LGBT people, but hate crime in general) are somewhere in the 1000. For a country with 17 million people I'd say that's a pretty damn fucking low number.
Furthermore I felt like you oversimplified my argument. You didn't read all my prior posts where I had this exact same discussion. It's not about 'I don't want to see this'. I am saying gay prides inconvenience people. They happen in public space and it forces people who might otherwise not have a problem with homosexuals to look at the gay prides.
Gay prides that often have content that has nothing to do with acceptance or 'highlighting the horrible experiences of LGBT people' but rather are aimed at having a party.
Imagine that there's a party aimed at heterosexuals, but this party also allows gay people. But the party is
really to celebrate being heterosexual. That's a weird concept right? But that's also what hetero's feel when they see a gay pride.
And yes I've been to gay prides and I was disappointed because it wasn't about acceptance or their struggles, it was about getting drunk and being sexual.
And also, I'm contrarian. I don't really care much about this issue whatsoever, I just like arguing, so whatever you're gonna say, I'm gonna try to disprove it anyway. It's a terrible trait, I know, but I just love being right so I always do my best to prove people wrong. Just letting you know so you don't overestimate how much I care for this topic.
