Rocketman

Comedy Tips w/ Awson

oh its rocketman
hi rocketman

@Azarthes

Hey diamonds
what's cracking

edit: shit, I thought there was post merging

Comedy Tips w/ Awson

<Snipped quote by Rocketman>

my asshole is being assertive. wat do?

@Vilageidiotx

Be assertive in response. You don't want your asshole thinking you're weak, otherwise it'll shit all over you.

Adversity and Pride

I'm supposed to be sleeping right now, but instead I'm getting carried away with this -.-

There's an image going around from tumblr that basically explains it. It's from the point of view of a physically disabled person who had to deal with similar reactions over their disability.

@Rica

I may be misinterpreting this, but I can't help but feel that I am being likened to the stereotypical 80's villains here. I'm sure it wasn't intended though. Now, bullying and teasing are condemnable. The kids in question involved in this scenario sound incredibly unreasonable, and I would hope are not seen as being representative of other able bodied individuals, nor are they representative I would think of the majority of heterosexuals.

What I take issue with personally is the writer of this post using the words "moaning and whining" when it comes to straight pride. This kind of language only serves to discredit the feelings of those expressing such a need for pride. When you've likened those on the other side to douchenozzles and they come across as the students from the Cobra Kai dojo, it serves to demean their argument. I personally would think it unfair of me if I were to say that LGBT individuals were "moaning and whining" about straight pride, so I would discourage and avoid that kind of language.

I also notice the use of the word "selfish". It's an interesting word to use. To me, selfish implies an unwillingness to share. It could be said that being unwilling to share in the right for a pride day could itself be seen as selfish. Feeling that the attention should solely be on your own pride day, and not on another opposing pride day, could also be seen as selfish. Again, this kind of language should be avoided. It accomplishes little other than to emotionally discredit the opposing argument, and only establishes an us versus them mentality. This is a matter of trying to work together rather than to insult one another.

Just so I can make my own understanding of the comparison clear, minus the persecution: the practical advantage that a handicapped person received, and the demand for such practical advantages from certain able bodied individuals, is the same as the LGBT community having a pride day and certain heterosexuals requesting one for themselves. I don't know if this is a fair comparison, as there really isn't much in the way of a practical advantage that one can attain from a pride day. It's not the equivalent of someone making my life easier, such as pushing me in a wheelchair. There is no celebration of diversity through doing that. Instead, celebrating heterosexuality is an emotional matter.

What people aren't understanding is that black people and gay people aren't getting preferred attention or bonuses. The 'bonuses' they're getting comes with a FUCK ton of baggage.

And on top of that this is two weeks after 49 queer men and women were killed.

That is why people cringe at the concept. We have these things because we are literally being murdered for existing. Heterosexual people don't have to deal with that.

@Rica

What happened in Orlando was a tragedy. My heart goes out to those who mourn their losses, and I know that as a heterosexual male, I can feel secure that I am not likely to face the same kind of threat specifically because of my gender.

However, and it pains me that I have to follow that previous paragraph with a however, I do not think that such suffering should invalidate the desire for a heterosexual pride day. If a group of heterosexuals wish to express pride in their sexuality, and congregate for celebration, then I do not see how such a gathering would prove to be threatening or demeaning to the LGBT community. I also don't see what kind of advantage that permits either.

Let met create an analogy. Gary and Barry have a wedding anniversary. For them, their wedding anniversary is incredibly important. Not only is it a celebration of the love they have for one another, but it is also representative of the struggles they've faced and overcome. Not only did they have to fight for their right to be married in the first place, but they also faced great opposition and social stigma because of their relationship.

On the flipside to this, we have Ted and Sue. They have a wedding anniversary of their own. Yet, Gary and Barry cringe at the idea of Ted and Sue celebrating their wedding anniversary. They don't think think Ted and Sue have earned the right to a celebration of their wedding anniversary because they haven't struggled in the same way that Gary and Barry have. In this instance, Gary and Barry are likening their own values of their day to that of another couple. However, for Ted and Sue, their wedding anniversary has nothing to do with Gary and Barry. It has everything to do with a celebration of themselves and the love they share for one another. Ted and Sue attain no advantage as a result of their celebration, other than an emotional one of having a day dedicated to something that is important to them.

We would love to not have to need or want parades and history months. But the Pulse incident proved we're a long way from not needing it.

@Rica

I feel like I keep on having to make this point of not intending offence, but I don't think the word 'we' is appropriate. You, as an individual, are not representative of the LGBT or black community in its entirety. I believe if there was no persecution, there would still be a significant number of people in both communities who would desire parades or history months. If, magically, no such persecution existed as of tomorrow, would the parades and the history months be scrapped, and those who desired them regardless of persecution be disappointed?

Not to be flippant, but we do have shark week. It isn't a week dedicated to the suffering and slaughter of sharks, as far as I'm aware. It's just sharks. Yet the reason it exists is because there is a demand for it. Yet the demand for a shark week doesn't detract from a black history month. In the same way, is it possible that a white history month could avoid detracting from a black history month?

Comedy Tips w/ Awson

<Snipped quote by KnightShade>

Then instinctively be an asshole. Being nice is for losers.

@VarionusNW

There's nothing wrong with being nice. Being unassertive makes you a loser. Being an asshole makes you a loser too.

Adversity and Pride

this belongs in bitchfest or unpopular opinions

@Dynamo Frokane

I'm quite happy with it being where it is, thank you

Comedy Tips w/ Awson

Note the first thing that comes to mind. It's probably something you've heard said in a similar situation. Don't say that. Say something else.

@Awson

Have more faith in yourself

Edit:

you could also just be a walking joke
like me

@Azarthes

You too bud

Adversity and Pride

I think where people get mixed up is that, when it comes to groups talking about pride, what they are really talking about is acceptance. So the old black pride movement, or the modern gay pride movement, was/is all about reaching out to folks who might feel shitty or ashamed of their status and getting them to accept that they have as much value as the majority population. It's pride as in bringing yourself up to equal status with the majority.

But actual pride, as feeling that the difference between you and another group puts you in a superior position, is something else. The White pride movement, for instance, would have more in common with the Black supremacy movement then black pride. There is really no need for a heterosexual acceptance movement because... yeh, we're pretty accepted. So we don't need to foster an acceptance of equality with the majority because... well, we are the majority. So all that is left is line-drawing at best, or if we are to be real about it, bringing ourselves up to a feeling of superiority.

This is where I think modern identity politics veers way off. It's useful to find socially minimized groups and say "Yeh, be proud that you are equal to the rest of us." But when you step off that path you just divvy up society in ways that aren't necessary. And you can say that about even the minimized groups when pride starts to seem more like secession.

So yeh, I'm heterosexual and I'm perfectly happy with it. I'm not going to turn it into a big thing though, start getting ">" bumper stickers and get straight pride shirts, because that seems weirdly secessionist. I'll stick to smiling at tits.

@Vilageidiotx

This was a good post, thank you.

Pride in a social majority is a difficult thing to encourage, as you said. White pride groups, for instance, seem to focus more on racial superiority and exclusion rather than a celebration of self-identity. This is a reprehensible position to take, and not one that should be encouraged amongst any group.

With that in mind, is it possible for a pride movement to occur that isn't fixated on 'other' group dynamics? Where instead of trying to bolster your position so that you feel as if you are on an equal footing with a different group, or, in the case of those in a superior/majority position, establish dominance, you simply celebrate your self-identity? That, to me, would seem fair.

For example, there is independence day within the US. This is a day of pride and celebration for those who identify themselves as American citizens, who form the vast majority of US residents. However, there are also those who live within the US who do not identify themselves as US citizens. Mexicans, Europeans, Canadians, whatever it may. Not to be flippant, but according to your definition, this would be a celebration where the majority is expressing pride in their identity and thus, establishing superiority over the minority. However, I personally see it as a celebration that does not detract from those who identify contrary to the majority. It is one where US citizens feel pride in their identity, but a pride that does not pose a threat to others.

With this in mind, isn't it possible that a member of the majority (heterosexuals) could express pride without it posing a threat to others?

Adversity and Pride

So I recently saw this shared on Facebook by a friend of mine:



Now, I feel like I need to preface my point with the following:

I believe that the LGBT community should be able to express pride
I understand that the LGBT community has faced, and continues to face, greater persecution than heterosexuals
I believe that LGBT people are deserving of equal rights to heterosexuals

With this in mind, to me it seems that the above post is an attempt to shame heterosexuals from expressing any sort of pride of their own. Such shaming is made on the basis that as heterosexuals do not face adversity for their sexual orientation, they are not entitled to pride. That by allowing those viewed to be in the superior position to express pride for their own identity, it diminishes the importance of the LGBT movement.

The same can be seen with men and women. For example, in 2015 the University of York cancelled International men's day due to an open letter signed by staff, students and alumni. Such a letter was written under the impression that recognition of men's rights would not diminish the gap between genders, but would instead widen it. Again, such a belief is formed on the idea that the issues of men should not be recognised due to the perceived greater struggle faced by women.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/17/row-after-university-of-york-cancels-international-mens-day-event

To me, in both these cases it appears that those who are seen to be privileged within society face less adversity. As a result, this lack of adversity means that the issues of the privileged are not as important, and that they are not entitled to pride. This lack of importance then leads to permitted shaming. A heterosexual should feel ashamed for feeling proud of their sexuality, and should be discouraged from expressing such pride. Likewise, a man should feel ashamed for trying to draw attention to his own difficulties as those of the other gender are seen to far outweigh his own.

What do you guys think? Should straight men be able to feel happy with their gender or orientation and say as much, or should they instead keep quiet instead because they'd be drowning out the voices of other genders and orientations.

How was your guys weekend

Moped

Perspective Taking Skill

This is a site filled with those who specialise in characters, and taking on their role, hence roleplaying. Because of this, I would imagine that a lot of people here are quite empathetic and understanding of others, due to the richness of understanding that is required in order to take on the perspective of another person.

Have you yourself foud that you have an especial understanding of others? Can you put yourself in the shoes of another person and relate to them, even, perhaps, to the point of them being predictable?

I'm interested in hearing examples also of your own perspective taking ability, such as how a situation played out to your benefit due to your ability to read others.