But what about the MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+ ?
https://mmiwg2splus-nationalactionplan.ca/
Edit: I forgot the 2 there
1 Like
Saying âI identify asâ can also mean nothing but âI pretend to beâ. Because anyone can âidentifyâ as anything they want, those are just words or personal feelingsâ/beliefs.
I can identify as an astronaut, that doesnât mean I am one.
The insanity of the radical LGBT+++ agenda is easily revealed here. No one is even allowed to ask someone for proof or reasons backing up their claim, let alone allowed to ask them what they actually mean by the claim. If someone says âI identify as maleâ but clearly they are a female, if you point out this basic FACT OF REALITY you are shunned as an evil bigoted terrible person. If you even ask them âcan you give me some reasons or evidence why I should believe youâ it is the same thing. IF you even express anything but total acceptance and support and agreement it is the same thing.
Not being allowed to accurately reflect what we clearly perceive as something true, but being forced by social and political pressure to bury our heads in the sand and pretend something which we think is false is actually true, that is the real crime behind LGBT+++. And this anti-realityism extends to L and G and B too, because we are not even allowed to ask about the causes or to what extent these sexual orientations are harmful or products of disorders or abuses/harms at the biological and/or psychological level, let along allowed to ask basic questions regarding the consequences of society idealizing and adopting LGB as positive social values or how this clearly goes against traditional norms that still exist as commonplace in the world around us today. Nor even to point out how political force was used to legalize acceptance and now to suppress counter opinions on the subject.
THIS is why people see LGBT+++ as by its very nature being tyrannical and anti-reality. Now all that could easily be fixed for the better if pro-LGBT+++ people would just act sane and calm and normal and allow other people to express their ideas and free opinions and feelings and ask meaningful and obvious questions without censorship or bias or threats. If pro-LGBT+++ people acted normal and rational and sane, a lot of these problems would be avoided and ironically they would go a lot farther in convincing people not to hate them.
1 Like
OK, what about it?
I was responding to someone commenting on someone else who thought it was ridiculous to center oneâs identity on oneâs sexuality or gender. I was pointing out that because they identify as gay say, that doesnât mean that is the only way they think of themselves. But in certain contexts they do focus on that.
If this is the facet of reality that they find tyrannical, they are in a luxury position. This does not mean I support all the woke ideas and practices, but really, there are players with incredible power right now siphoning money out of everyoneâs pockets as the food prices get hit by the oil issues. Apart from the killing. The actual tyrannts are very happy to have us thinking LGetc is one of the big problems in the world right now. And also happy that the woke crowd thinks misgendering is a top ten issue.
The part of this I hate is the way children are treated, medically and otherwise.
But letâs remember just being gay or even just seeming gay as a male, increases your chances of being physically assaulted by strangers significantly. Just seeming like maybe you are gay. Thatâs not someone yelling at you because you misgendered them. Thatâs direct violence. And it doesnât just affect gays, it affects all boys.
That doesnât make whatâs wrong about the woke movement right, but I am trying to put tyranny into perspective.
Where is the real tyranny today, the people with real oligarchic power, who set these kind of cultural wars up so they can change banking or make a war or increase the amount of executive orders or increase suveillance orâŚâŚâŚ
This is what happens when you mess with language and use meaningless bullshit terms like âidentify asâŚâ. It makes normal discussion impossible. No one âidentifiesâ as anything. Nothing âidentifiesâ as anything. Does a chair âidentifyâ as a chair? Itâs a fucking stupid expression that means exactly nothing but is causing a hell of a lot of problems. Eliminate that bullshit and everything becomes clear.
1 Like
I mean in the same sense of the original post about LGBT, but now about this with more letters
You can find several facets of things tyrannical at the same time. Exactly, tyrants benefit from people centering discussions about topics that, on the basis of government, should make no difference, like gender.
Yeah, there are several overlapping tyrannys of different levels all the time.
I think it is important to use that instead of âmy identity isâŚâ because identification is about an idea, and identity is about who someone is, and those are different. Of course, an identification entails the same treatment as any other identification (as it is being a fan of X team, for example), but not the same treatment as identity.
Now, if people allow that overt equivocation into law, they may allow a lot more equivocations, so I see that as a foot on the door type thing. In a way, it reminds me of how @Mary-Poppins pointed out that beliefs in cults â are often gobbledygook on purpose â as a measure of dissent. If this is a cult (criticism is anathema for L+ groups), that matches quite well
The meaningless terms are deliberate. I agree with Mary Poppins (I think thatâs what he was saying). How is anyone supposed to argue with gibberish? When a man claims to âidentify asâ a woman, therefore he is a woman, then how the fuck is anyone supposed to respond to that garbage other than to kick him in the balls??
1 Like
Very Diogenesian of you
I wonder what would have happened if Aristotle just said âI identify as a featherless bipedâ
thatâs the abstract idea of what people are doing. Iâm sure there are people who use that awkward phrase. Other might just say, Iâm gay. Iâm Finnish. Iâm diabetic.
I can never tell if people on here are agreeing with me or not. Very lunaticasylumesian.
1 Like
It is A facet of reality that is tyrannical. The way you phrase it as âif this is THE facet of realityâ indicates you are looking to attack a straw man, because you know your point is weak.
And caring about the truth is not a luxury, it is basic common intellectual honesty. Plus this is a philosophy forum. So, what are you doing here?
1 Like
Exactly right. They have thrown truth and common sense and intelligent discussion and honesty right out the window, all we are supposed to do is turn off our own minds and blindly agree with them. Thatâs it. That is what they demand, there is no other option according to their worldview. It is absolute madness.
1 Like
If it is A part of reality they find tyrannical, they are in a luxury position. Iâm happy to go with the indefinite article.
talk about a strawman. I neither said that nor can it be deduced from what I said as entailed.
Someone saying they hate calling a man a woman because they care about the truth, for example, is not the same as using âtyrannicalâ to describe the situation and I wouldnât have responded the way I did.
Wow.
Biting that bullet, eh? Ok then. I guess itâs better than admitting what you did.
Yeah it literally can. You said, âIf this is the facet of reality that they find tyrannical, they are in a luxury position.â Being in a luxury position because they care about the truth when it comes to this issue. That is literally what you meant. Meanwhile as I pointed out, caring about the truth is not a luxury. But feel free to keep defending them for some reason. Are you also the same guy who was defending Muslim pedos before, or was that someone else?
How is it different? Being forced to call a man a woman is tyrannical, and a violation of the truth (because it is, in fact, not true that they are a woman). Both are the case at the same time. I am sure you can see that. So why are you defending it?
Maybe youâre just a reactionary or iconoclast. You enjoy going against the obvious grain of things? Or do you just feel compelled to stick up for the âvictimsâ?
1 Like
No, being in a luxury position for thinking this is a tyrannical situation. Keep up the strawman if you have to.
That is literally what you meant
Actually I literally meant what I said.
Were you forced like tyrants force people to tell the truth or was some asshole screaming at you. You seem unable to see the difference.
Youâre the one who is claiming to be the victim of tyrants.
And there you go. Thatâs how careful you are as a reader. You donât even know. You canât be bothered. And you started our interaction with a misread of the context of what you quoted in my post to Flannel Jesus.
Are you the guy who thinks that +/- = +/- unites all the sciences?
No, youâre not. Youâre the guy who strawmanned me twice in a row in exactly the same way without interacting the slightest with what I pointed out I actually said. You think you know how I think about the woke positions on this stuff, but you donât. You got triggered and vomited.
Iâll ignore you from here on out.
@ProfessorX - you were right âtheâ made it a strawman on my part.
I stand by the âaâ version.
I still want nothing to do with you.
1 Like
Yes, and there are people that say âIâm a Manchester fanâ. That doesnât mean thatâs part of their identity - just their identification. So, even when it is not used literally, it is used so. Now, is being, letâs say, â2Sâ identification or identity?
Of course we are in that. For people to be in such a luxury position to see if their identification is 2S or not, is rather luxurious. Having internet too, having time to think too. And caring for truth too, and itâs important. Having the luxury to have a home, to be able to eat and sleep and think⌠quite luxurious.
To have to say that something that isnât is opens the door to quite worse things, too.
I donât know what 2S is.
Yeah, when they actually become tyrannical.
Have you had to say it, by the way? Have you been forced to say a man was a woman? What force did they use? Iâm not saying there was no force used. I am interested in the exact force, that time when you were forced to lie.
Iâve had certain kinds of force put on me to tell lies at work, especially when I was younger. Generally speaking, given the country I am in and my abilities, the force was unwanted unpleasant attention from the boss. Usually the force has kept me from saying something rather than the pressure to lie.
But anyway, let me know.
Are we arguing that there are now several compelled speech laws across the globe that punish misgendering? Or the fact that corporations have DEI and other sexuality based standards and guidance now? Or what ~10 year olds are being fed?
Or that you HAVE to âbake the cakeâ?
Not sure where the disagreement is here.
1 Like
Yeah, truth hurts doesnât it?
Hope you get over your ego-obsession someday 
then you might start to do some real thinking.