The Republican War on Transgender People, Drag Queens, and Queerness in General

Clinamenic

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
mixed_biscuits said:
The superior attractiveness, libido, and mental health of right wingers are empirical facts, which makes it odd that left wingers peg the incel phenomenon as being RW; maybe this is because left wingers have so little vim and vigour that they can't even be good incels. They're inincels (involuntary incels).
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it make more sense to refer to RW incels, then, as volcels? Or are you saying that RW incels are simply more based?
 
hmg

hmg

Victory lap
I was 5 and they had French bangers.

Çocukken yaptığım bir hata için özür dilerim. Lütfen beni affet. Bu hatayı düzeltmek ve bundan ders çıkarmak için elimden geleni yapacağım.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Clinamenic said:
A lot of the right-wing discourse seems to be populistically pandering to cultural preferences among their constituency, but for something like this to really catch on as much as it seems to have, there needs to be some fundamental, almost primordial instinct around which the discourse revolves, whether thats in good or bad faith.

In this case, it seems to be about protecting children, and here Padraig has given a few examples of conservative-leaning think tanks and social welfare organizations which have confessed to exploiting this notion of "protecting children" to curb trans/queer-related cultural and political developments they find disagreeable by conservative standards.

I suspect a, if not the, primary thesis driving this conservative discourse, however explicit or implicit it may be in different instances of this sort of messaging, is that your kid may be doing "fine" until they're exposed to gender-fluid/non-binary discourse, and from that moment a gender/sexuality-related complex is seeded in your child's mind.

Personally, I suspect the risk of this is negligible, although I'm sure there are some cases out there - if we can entertain the notion of being able to compare alternate realities and trace causal provenance of events as they fork into these different realities - wherein a child isn't experiencing any gender/sexuality-related identity dissonance of any kind, but are on the cusp of adolescence and thus about to have their sense of identity largely thrown into flux, and when they encounter discourse relating to gender fluidity, they subconsciously attribute their adolescence-related identity turbulence to some gender/sexuality-related dissonance they didn't know they had.

Anyway, that was my best attempt at articulating a viewpoint which I don't ultimately agree with, and which, while I understand that particular framing of it, I think has resulted in undue harm to a number of people experiencing dramatic difficulty squaring their identity with the world around them.
Click to expand...
What progressives can't see that the right have a gestalt appreciation of what progressives do and merely regard [latest initiative] as being another step in the reckless picking apart of the threads of society. Progressives have already done for religion, modesty, prudery, self-control, family, and now they are coming for science and biology. The last bulwarks of societal consistency and the reality principle.

It's not entirely clear what progressives want to replace all of these things with. There's a new religion that is based on Christ's 'the last shall become the first' maxim that only appears once a year and has an increasingly complicated flag but other than it all seems a bit up in the air.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Mr. Tea said:
Yeah man, because the Iliad, Epic of Gilgamesh and Rig Veda have absolutely tons to say about "based incels."
Click to expand...
You know what he's talking about. What is the prior probability of 1 in 100,000 people being right and all the others wrong...? Progressives really are that conceited.
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
mixed_biscuits said:
You know what he's talking about. What is the prior probability of 1 in 100,000 people being right and all the others wrong...? Progressives really are that conceited.
Click to expand...
If you think it makes sense to apply terminology that originated in the French Revolution and acquired its modern usage in the last century to distant antiquity, then by all means go ahead, but it's pretty stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top