How Will We Be Judged?

[MirrorMask]

What still baffles me is the total and complete ignorance about it and basic understanding of human biology. How many people think that homosexuality is a choice. I am heterosexual and I did not spend some days while I was a prepubescent teen looking at porn or whatever and then going "mh, let's say that for now I like girls, not sure, maybe I'm gonna change my mind". Liking girls was the most natural thing for me.

At the same time, if a person is attracted by a person of the same sex, that's not a choice or an act or rebellion, it's what they are and feel. It's mind boggling how people still don't get it. I don't even remember how I learnt about gay people - at a certain time I realized and accepted that some people liked people of the same sex. How people can fixate so hard on something is disheartening to say the least.

Just yesterday I saw an online episode of an italian journalist that has in depths reportages about towns, first I watched the episode of my town, and then one about London. He touched upon a number of subjects and persons and one of them was Alan Turing, and once again I was reminded of how this genius, father of the modern computers as we know them, cracked the Enigma code and helped to win World War II. Estimates are that he saved England two years of war, and 14 millions of lives. What was his reward? chemical castration because he was homosexual, which led him to commit suicide. It's infuriating every time I think of that.

I would like to deprive homophobic people of all the contributions of gay people to the world. Forbid them to listen to music made by gay people, to read books written by them, to watch movies where gay people worked. Even take away their computers because Alan Turing is basically one of the fathers of modern informatic system. Force them to live without any contribution, be it political, social, scientific or artistic, from gay people, see how it goes.

[Dream Team]

I see this has gained a lot more traction than my mention of millions of people being killed for others’ profit. Not surprised.

[bosk1]

Not sure why this has crossed so heavily over into P/R territory when I thought Harmony was pretty clear that that isn't what she wanted.  Do we need to move this?

[Stadler]

I would like to deprive homophobic people of all the contributions of gay people to the world. Forbid them to listen to music made by gay people, to read books written by them, to watch movies where gay people worked. Even take away their computers because Alan Turing is basically one of the fathers of modern informatic system. Force them to live without any contribution, be it political, social, scientific or artistic, from gay people, see how it goes.

Notwithstanding that if you get even 2 out of 10 that even know who Alan Turing is, let alone what his sexual preferences were, I'd be amazed, do you think that will effect any change?   Do you think they are going to just say "oh, wow, I miss that song; homosexuality must NOT be a choice or an abomination!" (And since I have to for some of you:  I 100% believe that homosexuality is simply one of many points on the natural continuum of sexuality and is no more a choice than tomorrow is going to be Thursday.)  That's not how the human psyche works, and is the underlying point for my "generally" comment, which some seem to have big problems with. 

There are now at least three specific posts here (and countless more in the P/R forum) that point to "marginalization" and "rejection", in some form or fashion, as a path forward in our fight against bigotry and "-phobias".   That's where this all went off the rails: me pointing out - in links provided above - that the science is (starting to) point in a different direction, and that marginalization and rejection may be making the problem worse.  To solve the problem of -phobias, the answer may be about the inclusion those that we find "repulsive" (for lack of a better word) for their beliefs, thus reducing the isolation and marginalization that ultimately led to the bigotry to begin with.  That doesn't mean you AGREE or PROMOTE the world-view of those you oppose, but instead of militantly driving them into their trenches, maybe extend a bridge from which we can teach and they can be welcomed into the world of tolerance.  Some will take that, some won't, and it certainly won't happen overnight, but it will be better than where we are now, because what we're doing isn't working.

For whatever reason, I don't have a strong "vengeance" gene.  I just don't.  Maybe if I ever find myself in Liam Neeson's shoes, that will change, but for now...  So for me, if we can just actually treat people fairly and equitably, I don't have any desire to require retribution from those who took longer to see the light.  I understand that others might, and I can even understand how some might be entitled to that in a perfect world.   But with research pointing where it's pointing, we may be faced with a hard choice:  would we place that "need" higher than getting rid of the very thing that triggered that need?

tl;dr for those that don't like the text:  The "intolerance of intolerance" point of view may actually be making the problem WORSE (this thread is proof of that; god forbid I wasn't unequivocal enough for you all!).  I think there are a lot of people - not referring to anyone here - for whom the war on bigotry requires an element of vengeance, retribution, and affirmation, and I'm pointing out that some science seems to indicate that component may actually stand between us and winning the war on bigotry.

[Stadler]

Not sure why this has crossed so heavily over into P/R territory when I thought Harmony was pretty clear that that isn't what she wanted.  Do we need to move this?

Well, it's almost unavoidable, since we have gotten to a place - at least in America, if not the world - where "judgement" for P/R stuff is not just welcome, but required.  They are almost inseparable.  Just look at the last page or so: I used "generally" in one instance of stating my position against "racism" and it got almost as much press as the original question, almost all of it unrelated to how I REALLY feel.  I might even have lost a friendship over it.

[bosk1]

I think there are a lot of people - not referring to anyone here - for whom the war on bigotry requires an element of vengeance, retribution, and affirmation, and I'm pointing out that some science seems to indicate that component may actually stand between us and winning the war on bigotry.

No need to shy away from the fact that it absolutely is present in people here on this forum, and on full display.    But I appreciate the attempted diplomacy.  I always find it ironic that folks who think that way seem incapable of seeing the hypocrisy in it.  It is just another form of intolerance and marginalization. 

[bosk1]

Not sure why this has crossed so heavily over into P/R territory when I thought Harmony was pretty clear that that isn't what she wanted.  Do we need to move this?

Well, it's almost unavoidable, since we have gotten to a place - at least in America, if not the world - where "judgement" for P/R stuff is not just welcome, but required.  They are almost inseparable. 

Well, yeah, I get that.  But I am trying to avoid having to move the thread if we don't have to.

[Skeever]

I see this has gained a lot more traction than my mention of millions of people being killed for others’ profit. Not surprised.

Not sure why this has crossed so heavily over into P/R territory when I thought Harmony was pretty clear that that isn't what she wanted.  Do we need to move this?

Well, it's almost unavoidable, since we have gotten to a place - at least in America, if not the world - where "judgement" for P/R stuff is not just welcome, but required.  They are almost inseparable.  Just look at the last page or so: I used "generally" in one instance of stating my position against "racism" and it got almost as much press as the original question, almost all of it unrelated to how I REALLY feel.  I might even have lost a friendship over it.

I think there are a lot of people - not referring to anyone here - for whom the war on bigotry requires an element of vengeance, retribution, and affirmation, and I'm pointing out that some science seems to indicate that component may actually stand between us and winning the war on bigotry.

No need to shy away from the fact that it absolutely is present in people here on this forum, and on full display.    But I appreciate the attempted diplomacy.  I always find it ironic that folks who think that way seem incapable of seeing the hypocrisy in it.  It is just another form of intolerance and marginalization. 

Not sure what's going on here, but here's a lot of passive-aggression in these last few points. Not sure why that is, or if anything in any of my posts has led to people thinking it'd be a pointless to address anything I've said here directly, but if so, I find that very regrettable.

[KevShmev]

I think there are a lot of people - not referring to anyone here - for whom the war on bigotry requires an element of vengeance, retribution, and affirmation, and I'm pointing out that some science seems to indicate that component may actually stand between us and winning the war on bigotry.

No need to shy away from the fact that it absolutely is present in people here on this forum, and on full display.    But I appreciate the attempted diplomacy.  I always find it ironic that folks who think that way seem incapable of seeing the hypocrisy in it.  It is just another form of intolerance and marginalization.

Agreed.  Generally speaking (oh no, there is that word!! Someone call the "Generally" Police!! ), I find it maddening that some who preach tolerance are so intolerant of any opinions or point of views that do not line up with their own. Take the Covid thread where anyone who has the nerve to express hesitancy to get the vaccine (I do not agree with them either) is talked to down to like they are stupidest person in the world.  There are ways of disagreeing with others, and it just feels like too many now are more concerned about being right than doing what it takes to find a middle ground, which I think sort of speaks to Stadler's POV.

[Skeever]

I think there are a lot of people - not referring to anyone here - for whom the war on bigotry requires an element of vengeance, retribution, and affirmation, and I'm pointing out that some science seems to indicate that component may actually stand between us and winning the war on bigotry.

No need to shy away from the fact that it absolutely is present in people here on this forum, and on full display.    But I appreciate the attempted diplomacy.  I always find it ironic that folks who think that way seem incapable of seeing the hypocrisy in it.  It is just another form of intolerance and marginalization.

Agreed.  Generally speaking (oh no, there is that word!! Someone call the "Generally" Police!! ), I find it maddening that some who preach tolerance are so intolerant of any opinions or point of views that do not line up with their own. Take the Covid thread where anyone who has the nerve to express hesitancy to get the vaccine (I do not agree with them either) is talked to down to like they are stupidest person in the world.  There are ways of disagreeing with others, and it just feels like too many now are more concerned about being right than doing what it takes to find a middle ground, which I think sort of speaks to Stadler's POV.

Well I personally don't appreciate the passive aggressive call out if it applies to me. It's one thing to take things to PM with somebody, or to call out somebody directly in the thread, but half a page of people saying "oh SOME people here are just awful" is pretty lame, far more lame than aggressively calling out someone's post directly, and thus I have lost complete interest in this discussion. And this is why I don't do P/R.

[KevShmev]

Well I personally don't appreciate the passive aggressive call out if it applies to me. It's one thing to take things to PM with somebody, or to call out somebody directly in the thread, but half a page of people saying "oh SOME people here are just awful" is pretty lame, far more lame than aggressively calling out someone's post directly, and thus I have lost complete interest in this discussion. And this is why I don't do P/R.

Well, considering this thread has had no less than three people calling out a poster for his posts being too long, I would submit that this discussion has been off the rails for a while now, which is a shame, cause I think Harmony had good intentions and a good starter post in this thread.

[bosk1]

There's nothing "passive aggressive" about it.  If you are intolerant of certain views, then what I said applies to you.  If you aren't, then it doesn't.  Simple as that.  It isn't to call out anyone specifically.  But my views on the hypocrisy of "tolerance at all costs...unless of course I disagree with you, in which case I absolve myself of the obligation to be tolerant" are not a secret.  It is prevalent everywhere, and this place is not an exception.  And that is applicable to what was being discussed.  Now are we really going to further derail the thread because you subjectively felt slighted by a more general post in response to Stadler?  If so, I don't get it, but you are certainly welcome to PM me about it.

[Skeever]

For Kevshmev- I agree that calling somebody out for having long posts is out of line. Asking someone if they have a real job on the forum is kind of like telling somebody who beat you at a video game that they "have no life". Sure it might be true but the playing field being what it is it's kind of a pot meets kettle moment.

For Bosk - As for me derailing the thread, I'm not doing that. I've made a few posts here. For the sake of discussion, I've asked people to be specific of any of the general complaints about the way people are acting here apply to me or anything I've said. Because I will gladly address those points if they are made. Obviously I cannot do that if the post-directed toward me is not clear about what I have said or which part has offended. That is all.

[kirksnosehair]

Yep, this was a mistake.  Adios

[kirksnosehair]

For Kevshmev- I agree that calling somebody out for having long posts is out of line. Asking someone if they have a real job on the forum is kind of like telling somebody who beat you at a video game that they "have no life". Sure it might be true but the playing field being what it is it's kind of a pot meets kettle moment.

sar·casm
/ˈsärˌkazəm/


Learn to pronounce[/size][/color]





noun






the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

"his voice, hardened by sarcasm, could not hide his resentment"