gender neutral kid switched up graduation

[SeventhSandwich]

First of all, the post I responded to was nothing but trolling.

Not trolling, but a personal attack, which are regularly peppered into my actual arguments.

I really don't understand why people get so offended by the notion that sometimes their opinion isn't terribly relevant. In case this is somehow not clear, obviously not everything you say is invalidated by your demographics, but your demographics mean that it is highly unlikely that you have a relevant opinion on reclamation of loveuality slurs. And of course, most importantly: unless you're a member of a loveuality minority (or a group that hates loveuality minorities) reclamation has nothing to do with you.

Alright, real talk time, Amade. In the grand scheme of things, your social views and my social views are essentially identical. I can guarantee with almost complete certainty that we will vote for presidential candidates with the same social views and vote on the same laws protecting and empowering underrepresented minorities. In terms of our personal views, we're practically identical save for very few insignificant differences.

However, what you've essentially told me and dozens of other people in this thread, is that our views are literal garbage because we don't have a personal story of adversity to share with everyone. It doesn't matter whether we've witnessed adversity by seeing a black man get beaten by police or a homoloveual get bullied in middle school, because our perspectives on race and loveuality are worth literally nothing to you. When people hear this, it makes them want to become more socially conservative just to spite people like you who claim that their views have no value.

The only reason I won't do that is because I'm sensible enough to recognize what's ultimately detrimental to society, but can you say the same for all the other white liberals who have had the misfortune of communicating with you? How many people have you turned off to the idea of social justice because of your racial gatekeeping?

Think it over, and talk to me later.

[Ad Bot]

[otto-san]

I really don't understand why people get so offended by the notion that sometimes their opinion isn't terribly relevant. In case this is somehow not clear, obviously not everything you say is invalidated by your demographics, but your demographics mean that it is highly unlikely that you have a relevant opinion on reclamation of loveuality slurs. And of course, most importantly: unless you're a member of a loveuality minority (or a group that hates loveuality minorities) reclamation has nothing to do with you.

i think the thing that's offensive is telling people that their opinion doesn't matter

[TristanLuigi]

Not trolling, but a personal attack, which are regularly peppered into my actual arguments.

Alright, real talk time, Amade. In the grand scheme of things, your social views and my social views are essentially identical. I can guarantee with almost complete certainty that we will vote for presidential candidates with the same social views and vote on the same laws protecting and empowering underrepresented minorities. In terms of our personal views, we're practically identical save for very few insignificant differences.

However, what you've essentially told me and dozens of other people in this thread, is that our views are literal garbage because we don't have a personal story of adversity to share with everyone. It doesn't matter whether we've witnessed adversity by seeing a black man get beaten by police or a homoloveual get bullied in middle school, because our perspectives on race and loveuality are worth literally nothing to you. When people hear this, it makes them want to become more socially conservative just to spite people like you who claim that their views have no value.

The only reason I won't do that is because I'm sensible enough to recognize what's ultimately detrimental to society, but can you say the same for all the other white liberals who have had the misfortune of communicating with you? How many people have you turned off to the idea of social justice because of your racial gatekeeping?

Think it over, and talk to me later.

couldn't have said it better myself

[Amade]

ok, so amade

people can be trans
it's just we don't give a stuff, you know?
like if you want to be a different gender than your love, just shut up and do it
we want to just continue with our lives and maybe call you by the right pronoun or whatever but we don't want to be stopped every 5 minutes to be reminded of how transgender you are
that's not going to work because you're basically just telling him he's an idiot every few posts
you're just making an ass out of yourself, knock it off

Please don't add replies to my post in bold, it's a huge pain in the ass to respond to. What I was doing earlier with Kearn was numbering his points in the quote and then labeling my responses with the corresponding numbers, this is a much easier format to reply to

"ok you have to be doing this on purpose, that wasn't even tangentially related to race. i was saying that just because we're not the subject of the opinion doesn't mean our opinion doesn't matter. where the HONEST forget did you get the idea that i was calling white the best race?"

I wasn't saying you were calling white the best race, I was countering your unrelated example with a slightly less unrelated example.

"then explain it instead of just mentioning his name"

He formulated the idea of plate tectonics long before it was an accepted scientific theory and was actually ridiculed for his idea for almost all of his life. About a decade after his death, scientific findings strongly implying the validity of the theory of plate tectonics came to light, and plate tectonics became an accepted scientific theory. My point was that just because not everyone agrees with you doesn't mean that you're wrong or that you should back down (but of course, if overwhelming scientific results disagree with you, you're probably wrong)

"last time this happened the entire forum shat on the business"

That is not true, check out the poll in particular

"afaik there is no autistic person in this thread so that's not relevant"

That is incredibly relevant. Every time someone uses "autistic" in a disparaging way, it reinforces the idea that autism=bad in the minds of everyone who reads it.

By the way, this is a very minor thing, but generally the preferred phrasing is "person with autism".

"INCLUDING YOUR OWN"

I have still not shared my opinion on reclamation because I know that I am informed enough that my opinion would be relevant or worth reading. Why do you (and so many others) think that I have?

"nobody is stuffting on trans people, they're stuffting on how some trans people feel the need to constantly point out how fabulously trans they are"

This is also false, check out General and Kearn's responses in this thread (eg around page 11)

"no, we're calling you a skeleton because of how your militancy about those beliefs, not the beliefs themselves, and because you think that we can't possibly have an important opinion"

(sidenote: I have a browser add-on that filters "skeleton" to "skeleton" and don't feel like correcting it in copy-pastes)
I feel strongly about social justice, forget me right? Trans people and members of other disadvantaged groups die every day to Self Delete and hate crimes and face widespread discrimination. If that doesn't call for passion, I don't know what does.

"this isn't quantum physics though. discrimination is bad, yelling all the time about how discriminated you are is annoying."

It's social justice, but that doesn't mean someone couldn't possibly be uneducated or undereducated about it. Where am I "yelling all the time about how discriminated [I am]"?

"you've had an opinion this entire time, just like we are."

I haven't shared my opinion because it's not relevant. It doesn't matter whether I have one or not because I haven't shared it.

"people can be trans / it's just / we don't give a stuff, you know?"

That's great, but a lot of people do for some reason. I'm not saying you in particular do.

[Foxscotch]

"hey wow that girl's tits are nice"
bam biological love
"dude have you not heard, he's transgender"
"oh"
bam gender identity

first of all, we're talking about non-strangers
and second, in that case the trans person still isn't being deceptive

[Dreams_Of_Cheese]

Here's to hoping you actually decide to reply to seventh's post and you don't just selectively ignore it

[IkeTheGeneric]

And of course, most importantly: unless you're a member of a loveuality minority (or a group that hates loveuality minorities) reclamation has nothing to do with you.

Doesn't mean they're not allowed to have an opinion on it :n

[ichiioma]

Doesn't mean they're not allowed to have an opinion on it :n

This.

[Amade]

However, what you've essentially told me and dozens of other people in this thread, is that our views are literal garbage

I've said that they weren't relevant, much like my views on the best way to advance scientific understanding of quantum physics, not that they are "literal garbage" - those are your words, not mine.

However, what you've essentially told me and dozens of other people in this thread, is that our views are literal garbage because we don't have a personal story of adversity to share with everyone. It doesn't matter whether we've witnessed adversity by seeing a black man get beaten by police or a homoloveual get bullied in middle school, because our perspectives on race and loveuality are worth literally nothing to you. When people hear this, it makes them want to become more socially conservative just to spite people like you who claim that their views have no value.

Next to the opinions of people who belong to power minorities, your opinion is less relevant. Next to the experiences and opinions of people belonging to the power minorities in question who are highly educated in social issues, they are practically worth nothing. It's nothing short of pure arrogance to assume that an uneducated or undereducated member of a power majority has an opinion that would Annoying Orange that of an educated member of a power minority.

Witnessing a number of instances of discrimination and harassment isn't quite as illuminating as actually living through discrimination and harassment that occurs almost constantly. It's a start, but it's just not the same.

I feel like a lot of people in this thread are assuming that I'm not a member of several power majorities just like everyone else here. Is it a tough pill to swallow that your opinions aren't always relevant? Sure, I guess. But I didn't have any problem with it. The countless editors of Wikipedia don't have any problem with not being able to insert their opinions into articles willy-nilly, or at least, the vast majority of them don't.

I'm not necessarily saying that anyone's opinions on reclamation are right or wrong. I'm not saying that reclamation is a good idea (or that it's a bad idea), because I am not educated enough to offer a relevant opinion on it. For what it's worth, the NAACP is against any and all use of the n slur (source by request), and therefore it's safe to assume that the organization's official stance is against reclamation of racial slurs is that it is a bad idea. Please do recognize that reclamation is a complex issue and that it isn't reasonable to generalize the NAACP's stance.

Doesn't mean they're not allowed to have an opinion on it :n

I've never said people aren't allowed to have an opinion, only that it's possible that their opinions aren't as informed and worth sharing as they may think

[Ipquarx]

The countless editors of Wikipedia don't have any problem with not being able to insert their opinions into articles willy-nilly, or at least, the vast majority of them don't.

A lot of the Wikipedia editors are truly despicable when it comes to certain politically charged topics. I'm not going to say what because I don't want to start another argument; this one alone is more than enough for one topic.

[TristanLuigi]

Please don't add replies to my post in bold, it's a huge pain in the ass to respond to. What I was doing earlier with Kearn was numbering his points in the quote and then labeling my responses with the corresponding numbers, this is a much easier format to reply to

"ok you have to be doing this on purpose, that wasn't even tangentially related to race. i was saying that just because we're not the subject of the opinion doesn't mean our opinion doesn't matter. where the HONEST forget did you get the idea that i was calling white the best race?"

I wasn't saying you were calling white the best race, I was countering your unrelated example with a slightly less unrelated example.

"then explain it instead of just mentioning his name"

He formulated the idea of plate tectonics long before it was an accepted scientific theory and was actually ridiculed for his idea for almost all of his life. About a decade after his death, scientific findings strongly implying the validity of the theory of plate tectonics came to light, and plate tectonics became an accepted scientific theory. My point was that just because not everyone agrees with you doesn't mean that you're wrong or that you should back down (but of course, if overwhelming scientific results disagree with you, you're probably wrong)

"last time this happened the entire forum shat on the business"

That is not true, check out the poll in particular

"afaik there is no autistic person in this thread so that's not relevant"

That is incredibly relevant. Every time someone uses "autistic" in a disparaging way, it reinforces the idea that autism=bad in the minds of everyone who reads it.

By the way, this is a very minor thing, but generally the preferred phrasing is "person with autism".

"INCLUDING YOUR OWN"

I have still not shared my opinion on reclamation because I know that I am informed enough that my opinion would be relevant or worth reading. Why do you (and so many others) think that I have?

"nobody is stuffting on trans people, they're stuffting on how some trans people feel the need to constantly point out how fabulously trans they are"

This is also false, check out General and Kearn's responses in this thread (eg around page 11)

"no, we're calling you a skeleton because of how your militancy about those beliefs, not the beliefs themselves, and because you think that we can't possibly have an important opinion"

(sidenote: I have a browser add-on that filters "skeleton" to "skeleton" and don't feel like correcting it in copy-pastes)
I feel strongly about social justice, forget me right? Trans people and members of other disadvantaged groups die every day to Self Delete and hate crimes and face widespread discrimination. If that doesn't call for passion, I don't know what does.

"this isn't quantum physics though. discrimination is bad, yelling all the time about how discriminated you are is annoying."

It's social justice, but that doesn't mean someone couldn't possibly be uneducated or undereducated about it. Where am I "yelling all the time about how discriminated [I am]"?

"you've had an opinion this entire time, just like we are."

I haven't shared my opinion because it's not relevant. It doesn't matter whether I have one or not because I haven't shared it.

"people can be trans / it's just / we don't give a stuff, you know?"

That's great, but a lot of people do for some reason. I'm not saying you in particular do.

0. ok numbering is cool that works hopefully you get which numbers go with which part
1. ok i guess? i don't see how your example is any more relevant
2. i know who he is, of course, i read the article, i just didn't see how that related at all to what we were talking about. also, i never said your opinion was wrong because it's the less common opinion (if that logic was true i'd be wrong about many things my friend) but rather that there's not much point to arguing it
3. you are definitely misinterpreting that poll. they are ABSOLUTELY not saying that what the business did was the right thing to do, but they are saying that they should be allowed to do it. that business has the right to deny service because that just makes sense, but i think almost nobody on the forum thinks he should have done it. just because you can doesn't mean you should
4. alright, but in this thread i haven't seen anyone be called autistic - and let's be honest, do you actually want to have autism?
4.5. yeah that's pretty minor and i'm not sure many people would be offended by that
5. we're not really talking about reclamation anymore. i actually disagree with seventhsandwich on the matter; it's not hurting the majority and it's helping the minority, so you know what? good for them.
6. alright, i never ventured to page 11 so that's my bad. people have the right to be transgender (although frankly any identity other than male, female, or neutral doesn't make sense to me)
7. i agree that something needs to be done, but there's a time and a place. when i'm graduating from school, nobody other than you and maybe your SO cares about your gender
8. see #7; in my opinion it's not really something that you can or can't be "educated" about (other than basic stuff like definitions) because it is entirely opinion-based
9. see #3; we're not talking about reclamation anymore, that was pages ago. we're talking about your opinion on everything else
10. i have no clue why anyone would care about someone else being transgender. i'm not going be bigoted and get angry about them being transgender, but i think it's fair that they just don't talk about it because nobody really wants to. again, just get on with it. i want to loving graduate already

as for your most recent post: unless it's a matter of scientific understanding (it isn't), everyone's opinion is relevant. that said, if someone asks you to stop using the N word next to them, don't.

[SeventhSandwich]

Next to the opinions of people who belong to power minorities, your opinion is less relevant. Next to the experiences and opinions of people belonging to the power minorities in question who are highly educated in social issues, they are practically worth nothing. It's nothing short of pure arrogance to assume that an uneducated or undereducated member of a power majority has an opinion that would Annoying Orange that of an educated member of a power minority.

Witnessing a number of instances of discrimination and harassment isn't quite as illuminating as actually living through discrimination and harassment that occurs almost constantly. It's a start, but it's just not the same.

I feel like a lot of people in this thread are assuming that I'm not a member of several power majorities just like everyone else here. Is it a tough pill to swallow that your opinions aren't always relevant? Sure, I guess. But I didn't have any problem with it. The countless editors of Wikipedia don't have any problem with not being able to insert their opinions into articles willy-nilly, or at least, the vast majority of them don't.

I'm not necessarily saying that anyone's opinions on reclamation are right or wrong. I'm not saying that reclamation is a good idea (or that it's a bad idea), because I am not educated enough to offer a relevant opinion on it. For what it's worth, the NAACP is against any and all use of the n slur (source by request), and therefore it's safe to assume that the organization's official stance is against reclamation of racial slurs is that it is a bad idea. Please do recognize that reclamation is a complex issue and that it isn't reasonable to generalize the NAACP's stance.

You're missing the point so hard here.

What determines the worth of someone's view is not their race. It is the content of what they're actually saying. Your policy of racial gatekeeping effectively alienates people who are your allies and who have equally valid things to say.

Like I said from the beginning, your race shouldn't play into what you're saying unless you're speaking for someone else. White people are not privy to the personal experiences of non-white people because it's literally impossible for them to live as another race. However, you seem to think that white people shouldn't share their views on anything related to social issues because they haven't personally faced that adversity. The fact of the matter is that white people do have important things to say, even if they can't provide a firsthand experience of the issue at hand.

But most importantly, your attitude towards majority groups is actively harmful to social movements. You can clearly see the trend right here in this thread. People who were ambivalent about gender and loveuality issues are now against them because of your hostility. If you want a good reason to include majority groups in the conversation, it's because they're the loving majority groups. You need them on your side to actually effect change in society because they make up the majority.

Does this make sense yet? Do you understand why it's ideologically and prudently important to include the opinions of everyone in your discussions?


edit: There's a surprisingly fitting irony within your post. I've edited Wikipedia for a few months now and the fact of the matter is that Wikipedia openly advertises that it's an encyclopedia not written by experts. Wikipedia doesn't run on experts who come to specific articles to share their wisdom. Wikipedia is run by non-experts who scour the internet and literature for the best sources that belong in the articles. Effectively, it's edited by people who don't have qualifications, but work hard to make sure that the sources they're citing are the best and most reliable. Their background is irrelevant because what they're saying has value.

[otto-san]

claims aren't substantiated by credentials or background; they're substantiated by the content that backs them, and everything else is essentially meaningless rhetoric. sometimes that rhetoric is important but it doesn't change the value of the claim

[Amade]

A lot of the Wikipedia editors are truly despicable when it comes to certain politically charged topics. I'm not going to say what because I don't want to start another argument; this one alone is more than enough for one topic.

Their opinions don't belong in the article, plain and simple.

4. alright, but in this thread i haven't seen anyone be called autistic - and let's be honest, do you actually want to have autism?

Someone used the word "austistic" in a disparaging way twice in one post a few pages back, and it's been used on other occasions in this thread alone as well.
I'm perfectly fine the way I am, thanks - and so are people with autism. There's nothing wrong with autism. I'm sure you wouldn't want to be another race, even if you don't have any problems with people of other races. Answers to that question don't prove anything because generally, people don't want to have their identity forgeted with (which is exactly why names and pronouns are important for trans people).

(although frankly any identity other than male, female, or neutral doesn't make sense to me)

And that's fine. It's quite outside of most people's experiences. Just don't treat gender-noncomforming people any differently than you treat anyone else.

8. see #7; in my opinion it's not really something that you can or can't be "educated" about (other than basic stuff like definitions) because it is entirely opinion-based

If it weren't something one could be educated about, there wouldn't be entire university departments dedicated to it.

as for your most recent post: unless it's a matter of scientific understanding (it isn't), everyone's opinion is relevant. that said, if someone asks you to stop using the N word next to them, don't.

Acually, it seems to me that you have that backwards. In hard science fields, nobody's opinions are relevant - something is true or it is false, and it is data that show this, not opinions. In all other fields, I don't think you'll find it hard to believe that some people's opinions are more relevant than others'.

Does this make sense yet? Do you understand why it's ideologically and prudently important to include the opinions of everyone in your discussions?

Do you have something to offer that hundreds of other people have not already insisted on interjecting into the conversation? Is the conversation missing the voice of the groups that you belong to?
No?
Then your opinion is not helpful because it cannot add to the conversation purely by virtue of its not being new.

claims aren't substantiated by credentials or background; they're substantiated by the content that backs them, and everything else is essentially meaningless rhetoric. sometimes that rhetoric is important but it doesn't change the value of the claim

But they are. I'm sure you'd agree with me that between an average black guy and an average white guy, one is much more likely to have experiences and views about racism worth sharing.

This isn't to say that one is worth listening to and the other is not. But it's unlikely that the white guy is going to have anything particularly poignant to say, and it seems to me, seems likely to shrug and say that the black guy would know much more about race issues than he would.

This is really not a hard pill to swallow.

I may not be explaining it as well as I could but this is how all of this concept (most people should just sit down, be quiet, and listen in social justice contexts) makes sense to me.

[Space1255]

Acually, it seems to me that you have that backwards. In hard science fields, nobody's opinions are relevant - something is true or it is false, and it is data that show this, not opinions.

Okay, but hear me out before you start a reply
After an experiment has been done, the results should not have any bias in them at all, that is true. However, before hypotheses are even made, you need to think about ethics. Most sane scientists will disagree with torturing a live being to see how long it holds out until death, but there are same scientists out there who might do the same thing. Also, the hypothesis also has some opinion in it, too, depending if any scientists are out there to prove a colleague they don't like to be a fool (which will backfire on them at some point). But it is true, that in the end, the conclusion is the same no matter how many times you do it the same, and no opinions should affect the conclusion.
If I sound like a richard, let me know.