Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism

Or by “traditionalist Islamic cultures like Iran” (Iran is a nation-state btw not “a culture”) did you mean “but not necessarily Iran, maybe one of those other ones, which is probably about the same as Iran”

Hi! Have I mentioned that I'm from Iran? :)

Tbh I was mostly heckling Aimless

Who I know for certain isn’t from Iran

But if he hasn’t killfiled me by now I would be surprised so it’s a wash

So did you read that Wiki or

I’m not looking to embarrass myself further if that’s what you mean I am dumb but not that dumb

I mean I'm not "Persian" as such, I just happen to have been born there after my parents fled from "one of those other ones" to Iran some 20 years earlier

And I've lived in NYC most of my life, we came here when I was a little kid

shortly after we got my grandfather out of jail

Anyhow what I'd really like to do is go back to Kate's initial post from a couple of days ago and reply to that, but I can't fucking load it so I might have to just improvise

I've tried to imagine who you envision participating in this 'debate', what is to be concluded, who is to be persuaded to the eventual conclusions, and why it would matter to anyone outside of the small group allowed to take part. otoh, if it is a discussion, not a debate, then it might do some good to discuss these issues with people who don't already agree. at least they'll be exposed to new thinking.

― the unappreciated charisma of cows (Aimless)

putting aside the irrelevant debate/discussion thing, I'm sorry, I just can't treat a person who takes the bell curve as a serious person. I don't know how else to put it. Like if I encounter them IRL, I'll engage w them how the situation demands, but I assume we're talking about, like, ppl who can be reasoned with. I don't think anyone who is anything less than a skeptic of the bell curve is worthy of serious engagement. they're a fundamentally dangerous person, which doesn't mean you dont engage w them, but it means you don't engage with them about the *content of their argument*, which is based on harmful bullshit.

what is the status of trans people in cultural groups which specifically denounce "western liberal democracy"

― the unappreciated charisma of cows (Aimless)

yeah i could see how that statement could be read that way. to clarify, i don't believe for a second that "western liberal democracy" invented transphobia, which has existed pretty much back to the dawn of history. what i'm saying is that "western liberal democracy" found new and innovative ways to codify and perpetuate transphobia that, by and large, failed to produce materially better outcomes for trans people than other historical cultures, while all the time patting themselves on the back for how much more advanced and tolerant and compassionate they were than those historical cultures. also, since "western liberal democracy" was the specific culture in which i was raised, i have a particular stake in how it implemented its specific mores in a way that i don't with "traditionalist Islamic culture". (As it happens, I do know trans and GNC people in a number of different countries around the world, including Iran, and the diversity of their experiences is powerful, often surprising, sometimes deeply painful. Their stories are not mine to tell, but they exist, and they are important.)

Anyhow what I'd really like to do is go back to Kate's initial post from a couple of days ago and reply to that, but I can't fucking load it so I might have to just improvise

― Deflatormouse

apologies if i'm making it difficult, i really don't want to suck all the space out of the room and keep others from contributing here, i just have a shitload to say

speaking of which:

I've been thinking a little more about those weird things some people just can't bring themselves to say. I mentioned before about those people who can't bring themselves to say "black lives matter" and the people who can't bring themselves to say "trans women are women" and immediately what I got back was a "no true scotsman" argument about how anybody who couldn't say those things wasn't a real liberal. That just struck me kinda funny.

I mean, it's not really that I never said people who couldn't say "black lives matter" or "trans women are women" were liberals, although it does confuse me generally when people argue with a statement I didn't make. Maybe I didn't express myself very well, maybe the person was so upset at the very idea that a liberal might deny that trans women are women that they had to correct my error right that very second, maybe, you know, who knows? Could be lots of things.

And it's not really that the "no true scotsman" argument is a well-known logical fallacy. Seriously even in - especially in - objective, rational arguments, people make logical fallacies all the time, and that's kind of a nuisance sometimes, but my experience is that it seldom does any good to point these things out. I can't think of a better response than to just shrug and ignore it when someone says something like that.

And yet I'm coming back around to it, and it's not because I want to pick on the poster, but because it genuinely confuses the hell out of me that it's considered normal and acceptable in many circles to make judgements on the authenticity of other people.

When I first started hanging out on trans discord, one of the first things I learned was to never tell anybody whether or not they were trans. That's just a matter of practical experience. One learns very quickly that if someone comes onto a trans discord and asks a room full of trans people "Am I trans?" they probably have an answer to that question in mind. Someone in that position - and a lot of us have, at some point, been in that position - usually isn't looking for someone else to tell them the answer - they're asking for permission.

I mean, yeah, that's kind of fucked up. You shouldn't have to need a permission slip from a trans person in order to say "Hey I'm trans." That's how it is for us. The reason there's literally a book called "Yes, You Are Trans Enough" is because pretty much all of us have had the experience of being told, over and over again, "No, You Are Not Trans Enough", even though it was a lie, even though it fucked us up and hurt us, to the point where we internalized that bullshit, believed that bullshit. One of the weird things that actually happens to us is that even after years of being out, years of transition, we will still sometimes ask ourselves "Yeah, but am I _really_ trans?"

Having had that experience, it's pretty fucking important to me to not tell other people who they are. But liberals, I mean, not only is that not important to them, it's something they have this weird need to do. It seems like it's never enough for liberals to just speak for themselves, they gotta speak for other people too. Not only that, they assume everyone else is doing it as well. Often when I talk to cis people they get this weird assumption, that I actively have to fight against, that I speak for all trans people. I sometimes get the feeling that the idea of actual, like, diversity is disturbing to them, and I _particularly_ get the idea that the idea of self-determination is a direct challenge to the core of their worldview.

Thinking about it more, I think the things that that other poster was quick to say "no true liberal" believes, I feel like those are honestly really extremely liberal things to believe. "All lives matter" - I mean, that is absolutely a textbook liberal statement, isn't it? The idea that everybody is equal, everybody is equally important, it's certainly at the core of what I was taught. I get why someone who believes that might have a problem with saying "Black lives matter". While of course logically there's no contradiction, there's some inkling of what's _implied_ by that statement. It perhaps suggests the idea of "special treatment". To white liberals, when Martin Luther King talked about, in their favorite fucking speech of his, dreaming of people being judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character, they somehow decided that the way to make that happen was to instantly start pretending everybody they talked to was just as white as they were. "Black Lives Matter" is a threatening statement because it requires them, on some level, to acknowledge the _existence_ of black people.

Not only was the whole "pretend everybody's white" idea not really a good idea in the first place, the people who adopted that ideology did a fucking awful job it it. So they've spent all this time living a lie, a very bad and obvious lie to anybody who's suffered the consequences of it, and they live in terror of anything that might possibly expose the lie, because this lie is at the core of their self-concept, of their value system, of their actual identity. We Are All Equal, and the only way to make it so is to keep saying it, over and over and over again. Justice, after all, has to be blind, which means, logically and sensibly, that justice must necessarily be blind to injustice.

I was talking to my brother today about my experiences as a trans woman. I was talking about seeing all the ways in which I am treated differently, the different sorts of scrutiny I am put under, since transitioning. And he promptly and immediately told me that he didn't believe I was being treated differently as a woman than I was as a man, that I certainly didn't get treated any differently than I did, that I was just more sensitive to such things since my transition.

My brother is not a liberal, just as I am not a liberal, but this is how we were both raised, this is the legacy we have to deal with, and again, it wasn't something where I was going to press him on. I pointed he was offering his opinion on my lived experience, he agreed, and I said "OK" and moved on. If I'm going to argue with someone I first think about whether it's going to help or not, and arguing with him just wasn't going to help. I have never been a patient person. It's not been one of my strong suits. I've had lots of opportunity to practice, these past few months.

Of course what my brother said to me was incredibly rude and offensive, of course, but mostly I wasn't hurt. Again, I was just really confused. I just really don't get why my brother, who is a Good Person(TM) and is really supportive and cares a lot about me, who has done a lot of good work and continues to work hard on a lot of things, didn't see any problem with saying that to me.

Denying that I get treated any different as a trans woman than I did as a cis man isn't at all equivalent to denying that trans women are women, but I perceive it as being sort of along the same continuum. It consists of a certain sort of license, arrogating to oneself the right to project one's own beliefs onto other people's reality, to, well, reject my reality and substitute their own.

I feel like this has, perhaps, some relation to the extremely fraught and complicated notion of "passing". "Passing" is a really important goal to a lot of trans people. It's a guarantee of safety, of protection from prejudice, even in places that would otherwise be dangerous to trans lives. For me, it's a really psychologically weird sort of performance. Trans women learn, particularly early on in transition, to exaggerate our femininity, to behave in really stereotypically "feminine" ways. We put on an act in order, ultimately, to convince people that we are authentic.

But the standards by which we are judged are precarious, are arbitrary. Attempting to "pass" can be dangerous and scary. Whether we "pass" or not isn't really dependent on us - it's dependent on each and every person we come into contact with. It's about how closely our presentation reflects their internal Platonic ideal of the gender we're presenting as. This means that we can't really _know_ how well we pass, so we set really exacting standards, put ourselves under a tremendous amount of pressure. In reality most cis people are pretty clueless about what trans people are really like. Most cis people don't really care, don't scrutinize us too closely, don't really _question_, and as long as nobody asks the question, I'm OK. Just like it is for us when we come out to ourselves, though, as soon as someone asks the question, they already know the answer.

And this, I think, has some bearing on the difficulty the statement "Trans women are women" has to some people. "Womanhood", to some people, is a basically homogeneous group, defined by its similarities, threatened by its differences. To say "Trans women are women" is not just to welcome us in the larger category of "women", but implicitly to acknowledge _difference_ within that category. When I look at women, I see not a homogeneous group, but a tremendous, amazing amount of diversity. There are black women and white women, gay women and straight women, women with kids and women without, tall skinny women and short curvy women, and all of those differences are there to be celebrated, to be uplifted, not to be glossed over or ignored. Honestly, that's not what I was taught, and those just aren't the values by which a lot of liberals seem to live their lives.

Liberals failing again.

#PolandVotes, official results (99.97% votes counted):

Andrzej Duda 51.21%
Rafał Trzaskowski 48.79%

Turnout 68.12%

It's mathematically impossible for Trzaskowski to win.

ANDRZEJ DUDA RE-ELECTED AS PRESIDENT OF POLAND

— Jakub Krupa (@JakubKrupa) July 13, 2020

apologies if i'm making it difficult, i really don't want to suck all the space out of the room and keep others from contributing here, i just have a shitload to say

Well, I think you've done an excellent job of turning this debate into a conversation. And that is no small feat.

A liberal might and probably should think that all lives matter, but it's coded by now as revanchist anti-BLM language, so no liberal aware of this would be wise to say it, especially as a slogan.

I just think it's possible to be, to some degree, liberal, but also be smart about it, and see the necessity of embracing and promoting the whole variety of human experience to the degree it requires. Just as it's also theoretically possible to be communist and not "stan the hammer and pickle", cmon

"All lives Matter" has always been used as to counter BLM and if you used it you are definitely not smart, and I am not waiting to find you out whether you are a bigot.

I don't think liberalism has failed entirely, i do think that Americans tend to be, for lack of a better word, very idealistic, very fixated on how things ought to be. There's also a lot that's very wrong with the way Liberalism has borne out, a deep rot that has taken hold. And because of those two things, a lot of what ime have been the successes of Liberalism are taken for granted. I understand how easily that can happen when you're suffering, you're going to be inclined to ask "what's wrong?", you wouldn't think to ask "what's right?"

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcysUzgX0AAKuzA?format=png&name=900x900

this is his reaction after Brian has had the piss taken out of him for making a thick and completely factually wrong comment about the UK parachute regiment.

now that is not smart, this kind of performative self-indulgent despair from people of great power and influence. all they're doing really is rounding up their troops for counter-attack

but i maintain that cox isn't being a liberal there, he's being an elite, lord of his fiefdom, keeper of the key. there is nothing liberal about that outburst

he deleted the tweet because he knew it made him look stupid, but yet..

well he showed his ass didn't he

a true scotsman isn't afraid to be wrong

Xxxxxp....for me, like, the ability to loudly and openly flout social conventions is a very big deal. and that's something i'm very conscious of all the time, and i feel very fortunate to have that kind of freedom. It is not something I could ever take for granted, and maybe i can't afford to. Not just to be able to celebrate pride, though certainly also that. But to indulge, sometimes publicly, in my individual eccentricities. Which are considerable.

...And I do consider that, ultimately, to be a major success of Liberalism. I would not consider it a failing because it did not come easily, or painlessly, or quickly. And that's mainly what I wanted to add here.

Any thought Brian? Really now? Love too hear that you’re being persecuted for your opinions on the heroes of Bloody Sunday though, imagine how the families feel.

xp ...Now I am not an educated person. I never wrote a thesis on Derrida, I didn't go to college. I never even finished high school; I barely know who Aristotle is. Imposter syndrome otoh, I know a little about. I am not a real Arab. I am not American. I am not a real Persian, because my lineage, and my language, is Iraqi. I am not really Autistic. I am not high-functioning. I'm not really gifted, and I am not really disabled. I'm not really gay. I've been attracted to other men only, both romantically and sexually, but I am terrified of sex and do not desire to have sex with other men. I am not a real man, and I'm not a real boy. I am only a fraud. I do not exist.

Cox is absolutely being a liberal there. That's just what they say. I should just have the right to speech, and if that veers into hate speech, well, too bad.

"All lives Matter" has always been used as to counter BLM and if you used it you are definitely not smart, and I am not waiting to find you out whether you are a bigot.

....One of the questions I get asked a lot, to this day, is "what are you?" and I understand that when they ask me this, what they mean is "why aren't you white?"

People ask you "what are you"? Apart from the dreaded "where are you from" you'll undoubtedly get as well? That's absurd.

doubtless liberals!

tbf the movie Get Out very neatly attacked a certain pattern of thinking in elite liberal circles - wanting to quantify what people are in order to exploit them along identitarian lines

but again, this represents just as elitist a corruption of the liberal ethic as brian cox's lamentable flapping

if the person you’re “debating” won’t let the conversation move past ‘well actually I think it should be called egalitarianism’. Which is the whole reason that tactic is employed in the first place.
― scampos mentis (gyac), Monday, 13 July 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Liberalism is full of performers with what they think are clever debating tactics. People there solely to suck the air out of the room. This thing that is someone's life is just not that important to them.

Then they vote Lib Dem or Green in an election and allow the Tory in. Oops, didn't mean that! The Observer or this tactical app told me this is what I should do. It kills people.

i know you are bored and are whipping me up to say this, but: i voted for corbyn both times, please go and jump off a cliff or something

This Brian Space guy is the worst kind of liberal coward. Taking down that post is some weak shit. Either stand corrected, or stand your ground and offer to fight anyone who disagrees, not this mishmash of cowardice and self-importance. Come out punching if you mean it bro

lol and i know "i voted for obama, twice" is a line in get out i know i knowwwww

Lol the liberal is just telling me to kill myself now. It's what they do.

Liberals ARE going to the gulags because deep down they know they have no fight in them. Their fear isn't performative, they know they are out of shape, but more importantly lack any form of courage. This is why there is no respect for them

Treeship, apropos of nothing I'd like to have it on record that I enjoyed your post about Derrida et al. I've been putting in time reading and properly understanding his 'Monolingualism of the Other: or, The Prosthesis of Origin', where you lifted his language quote from. It's (for me) a tough read, but a very rewarding one.

as sealioning has been mentioned though why don't we talk about other illiberal debating tactics? such as

imago:

A liberal might and probably should think that all lives matter, but it's coded by now as revanchist anti-BLM language, so no liberal aware of this would be wise to say it, especially as a slogan.

xyzzzz:

"All lives Matter" has always been used as to counter BLM and if you used it you are definitely not smart, and I am not waiting to find you out whether you are a bigot.

and sure i'm now rallying my non-existent troops but what is this horseshit if not taking exactly what i said and spinning it so that not only did he say it first but that by implication i'm Bad or a Bigot - this isn't about cancel culture obv as a dislikeable dweeb like alphie could never hope to cancel me but it is about disingenuous point-scoring. idk what my actual point is here other than that once again i'm rattled

Lol the liberal is just telling me to kill myself now. It's what they do.

― xyzzzz__, Monday, 13 July 2020 09:55 (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

you are without a doubt the most pathetic cunt on ilx. please just fuck off and leave me alone

fuck off

fuck off and die

Sorry for the crosstalk, breaking this up into multiple posts. So I am... someone who Intersectionalists could make a hearty alphabet soup out of (though I'd prefer if they didn't). I've been bullied, harassed, intimidated. I will never not be afraid of bullies.

But before all of that, In my earliest memories, I was persecuted by an oppressive regime.

The thing that scares me about Intersectionalism, going back to that 1-2-3 post of j.'s and the 3 bit in particular. Is what is going to happen to the 'different' people who just fall between the cracks, the socially inept, the nerds and weirdos, the benevolent eccentrics who do not have identity groups to advocate for their needs. Who currently are permitted, ultimately -if perhaps not easily or painlessly- to go their own way without persecution, when we are no longer "individuals". When the demands for solidarity, for... what did the Harper's letter call it? "Ideological conformity"? have eclipsed our individuality. The freedom to not belong.

And I am hoping to be reassured that this concern is illegitimate.

yes, that's right - i told you to die why haven't you died yet

you are entirely useless you offer nothing you like nothing you bring nothing you are a chasm of shit

"idk what my actual point is here other than that once again i'm rattled"

Poor LJ you don't have a point, don't worry yourself thinking you did. At least j. has read a few books.

go to hell

you're a monster