Pants-of-dog wrote:Getting back to your conspiracy theory:
Why should the powerful have to trick anyone when traditional gender roles are already outdated and useless for a lot of people, including non binary people?
Do you think traditional gender roles are just so inherently awesome that people would never consciously abandon or ignore them?
i. It wouldn't be deceptive or tricky to have a straight forward debate about gender roles like all of the West was doing in the sixties and seventies.
It is deceptive and tricky to say that all of these other genders exist which don't exist
and to never put forward any effort into unpacking everything that it entails. It is also a bit odd because no one wants to talk about the depths that biological gender influences physical reality.
For instance, the universality by which men are more likely to be violent criminals or the way in which they dominate the chess world in spite of it being a purely mental sport are very much things worth discussing, and they are also very much things influenced by the biological reality of having testosterone and a masculine mental profile... but no one wants to discuss it, and that is never the talking point.
But you have a point: is it really necessarily fair to say that the media, academia, etc.,
are being deceptive? What if they are just bad at being objective and this isn't intentional?
In that regard, sure, I am not so heavily committed to the idea of saying that it is all perpetrated through willful deception. However, to assert that dozens of genders exist without unpacking them or pointing to some real, actual basis
seems... like a bad take on reality.
And when people say that this is science,
and elites say this is science
, and Bill Nye says this is science,
I think they are actually being deceptive.
ii. I think traditional gender roles also shifted from generation to generation, but never shifted as extremely as they have now.
I think there are natural changes in how we perceive the relationships between men and women, and the role of women within the household.
I also think it is entirely excusable to say that these would have to change a lot because of the fundamental shift in the division of labor.
But these are things that all operate in the male/female basic concept of gender and labor.
I think these don't have that much to do with the topic at hand of non-binary.
No one cares if you accept then as a reality. The LGBTQ equality movements are not about getting you to agree. It is about securing rights regardless of whether or not you agree.
And it doesn't matter to me if you agree, either. It's about restoring people to sanity.l
What does this word salad have to do with the fact that people are not interested in confining themselves to tradygender roles if they do not feel like it?
Should people not act in their own self interest?
It is commonly said that conservative Republican people do not act int heir self interest by voting Republican.
No one acts in their self-interest by convincing themselves they're pangender or non-binary.
You claimed that the powerful elites are using their media influence and academia inflto attack traditional gender roles.
I asked how they gained anything by that.
You claimed that they gained something because they hate traditional gender roles.
I pointed out that this means that they hqve no material gain, despite having to pay for this disinformation campaign in media and academia.
... But why would this campaign have to be paid for if the bulk of people involved are in agreement?
And this is not even an organized campaign.
If you make a gender studies department an LGBTQ related sociology department, what do you think those people are going to do with their free time? And what will result when we have plenty of kids learning these things for decades?
A whole wing of people in society that believe these things.
And, of course, it will also result in well funded PACs and other organizations, right, but that's beyond the point. There's actually a good video from Mass Resist that talks about how the LGBTQ movement has not been grassroots for a long time, and there really is a lot of money involved in it,
but that isn't what I am here to say.
I am here only to say that the bias does exist, and that these people do advocate for this because it is what they are ideologically committed to.
There doesn't have to be a meaningful material sacrifice when the bulk of people have been brought onto this over the decades through education.
Let me put it in plain langauge:
This claim of yours (that they are deceiving themselves) is unverifiable.
You cannot prove it. You cannot show it is true or false.
I am now going to ignore it because it is, from a debate standpoint, not very different from just an opinion.
You are being really obtuse here, POD:
They are deceiving themselves
int he same sense that it is said that Christians deceive themselves by convincing themselves of the truth of the Gospels.
It's a turn of phrase -- not a complicated discussion about psychological realities.