Steam Forums and Pride Month

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

This thread moves at a relatively fast pace for a Warframe topic, getting into some complex ideas and topics. Personally I am grateful its stayed open so far, just because I do actually that that such threads can have its benefits. I understand why many will be skeptical or cynical though, but to my current best understanding, and contrary to some beliefs, people can, will, and do change, or can have their perceptions, attitudes, viewpoints, opinions, shift around. It in itself can be an interesting and complicated subject, because obviously, people are aware, that if you come across someone with a certain stance that seems pretty hard set and stubborn, how often will a random post saying something to the contrary, get them to actually reevaluate their position or stance? It can be pretty rare, more so, sometimes thats not even necessarily the goal of the post saying something contrary, as it can have other functions. Like disagreeing because you simply disagree and think your understanding of the topic or reality is better or more accurate and your argument/reasoning demonstrates this, or you may put more priority and emphasis on persuading people who may be more open, in a neutral spot, maybe more apathetic but willing to listen, etc.

Anyway, people are complicated, and sometimes it can  take time for them to digest information sometimes, and sometimes its less about one post on a random online forum for a random game, that changes there mind, sometimes its about an accumulation of various small ideas as well as big situations... like if one day their child may seem trans and they may wish to consult a health professional they trust, or if a long standing friend comes out to them, or maybe they have a neighbour that is really friendly and helps them a lot, and they discover they are trans, or actually maybe on Friday nights, they are a drag queen or king. Then something small can shift, and they think... maybe I use to overgeneralise negative aspects too much, or address this issue too abstractly , because it was just perception based on Youtube channels or Social Media... Just as examples though, because there are lots of ways and directions people can change. Some could be argued to regress, sometimes some peoples stances are reenforced, are double downed. From what I know, and just in a neutral sense, as their can be good and bad aspects to this, but generally from what I know, is that people who are less willing to change their mind on certain issues, can often believe that is true of most/more people, just because thats their own thinking. So they can find discussion/dialog less intrinsically valuable or worthwhile, because of that general intuition and reflection of their own beliefs. When, depending on the situation, and scenario thats not actually necessarily accurate, as many people can be more flexible, open minded and willing to change their views and mindsets. Just depends on certain variables. So those such individuals, dialogue, discussion and even argument can be highly effective. Though not just necessarily as far as changing perception or stance, but also affirming, reaffirming and consolidating. 

For example, consider a cooperative setting, where everyone's highest priority is to cooperate, and ego and emotions are fine, but generally not as prioritised as neutrality, truth, accuracy, and learning. I basically just described a really good science team in a lab. Not consider a more combative, competitive setting. Where you have different individuals or groups, and your priority is to have certain mutually exclusive goals. Can still be neutral, but for example a chess game. Many sports. Sometimes, for some, the point is to not budge. Like a loyal sports fan. 

Thing is, such perspectives and reflections of attitudes can be carried elsewhere. It can turn some issues that are social, or science in nature, into politics, but a certain kind of politics. Consider political systems with essentially two party systems, versus political systems with more nuance as far as how people can vote, and how parties have to rely on each other, in practice as well as theory, versus systems where well, the power imbalance is such that there is only really one party, in control, because thats status quo or potentially corruption... See some people treat politics like a sports game, with a Home and Away side, and you juts got to always support the Home side. Which means many social issues, like those around LGBQT are also just about supporting the Home side. Even if the Home sides current stance is very different from what it was 50 years ago (same with the Away side).. Two party systems (even if others are technically allowed), can especially encourage this, for a few different ways, some obvious, some more discreet, but it can also reenforce another complex set of issues around behaviour. Our team doesn't have to be that right, if the Away team is really wrong. By default we win. So if its easier to focus more on discrediting, undermining, misinterpreting, mischaracterising and others acts of bad faith, manipulation, etc well thats technically good no? Since it means our side wins? 

Except you probably shouldn't do or want that unless you are a career politician living in a place where your livelihood depends on the ignorance, naivety of the people around and under you, and you have a really nice home with tall gates. Otherwise stuff like Covid will happen, and because the system was encouraged to make people suspicious of the other side, misinformed about science and the value of science and science literacy, as well as mislead about various related areas like economics, well a lot of people that didn't need to die, died, because a sports term like, competitive, only support one team, and distrust the other, approach and attitude, isn't as effective as combating such issues as a more unified, dedicated, pursuit of solving such problems like say a good science team working in a lab. Where disagreements and arguments still happen, and should, but without ego, pride and insecurity being as present (as in its considered less valuable there than actual competence, and actual knowledge). 

So for some people everything I explained, is a lot more intuitive and realised, and may even be "common sense" but for some others its not. Alternatively some will just think its just bunk, because I am probably the other Team, opposed to their Team. Or its not that exactly, but then they say stuff which makes it seem like that is actually what is, but they are just a bit generally more aware of the optics involved. 

Thats my long intro, disclaimer, and preamble, because sometimes people talk about and invoke science, but in my mind, I am not sure if they are either applying a "my sports team must always win" approach or a "lets all sincerely try to work together to have the best understanding of this issue" science team approach. Not that thats the only way to think about situations, but as a nice fast generalisations. 

For example when I was younger, gay marriage was illegal in my country, and many countries. Most, and some people use to use an argument that attempted to be scientific sounding, and thus more objective, correct and matter of fact, and thus true, but claiming that homosexuality is unnatural, a sin, and a choice sinners make, because you don't see any homosexuality in nature. Our species wouldn't have survived this long if more people were sinners, and a few similar type arguments. Counter arguments... well a lot exist, from questioning the interpretation of what is "natural" and "unnatural" and its relevancy. Regardless homosexual behaviour does exist in non homo sapien animals (some people actually struggle to think humans are also animals), depending on what you mean exactly, and the degree, since, well there are a lot of different animal species with their own nuances and complexities, some estimates of same sex sexual activity behaviour perceived in different species, is well beyond upwards of 1000. That we know of, or have perceived, enough to make claims around. 

How much of this info was available when I was a child and people made such claims? Well thing is, there are probably still going to be people today, who think that no homosexuality exists in nature apart from humans, who choose it, because they can, and do so as a sin, and "unnatural act". Some of them will just believe that, because thats what they thought when they were a kid, and because they held to that, and because their Team needs to win. Also, I was a kid back then, so when people use to make that claim, I didn't know better. I didn't have the knowledge and understanding to correct people, so I would sort of just shrug and think I guess. 

Thing is, science is a broad and nuanced idea too, because depending on context... well science can be a tool, a field, a method, a subject, a system, knowledge, an institution, an idea... It also doesn't exist in a vacuum. It can be applied... which means it can need an agent to apply it, and in that case, its effectiveness may also be influenced by the strengths and weaknesses of the agent... Which is why we can have good science, bad science, actual peer revived and endorsed science and pseudoscience. Pop science, and cutting edge science. Knowledge and understanding can expand and change a lot, it can be a strength. Thats before we even add in communication, language, linguistics, and science communication (from experts to layman), or even the internal disagreements and disputes within science, which of course their can be many, and it can take a while to potentially sort out. Especially when you consider how much... just exists. You take your average career scientist who knows a lot, especially practical knowledge and application, with minimal special tools required and you put them into the past 100, 200 years ago, and that average scientist is the most important and influential person in history, probably. Its just the way our collective knowledge has expanded over the course of human development. You can get a lot more specialisation now. 

For example, humorism, the humoral theory, or humoralism, was a system and theory of medicine, that generally addressed the idea of bodily balance, and health as determined by elements. For example blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile, or phlegmatic, choleric, sanguine and melancholic. Such ideas stretching back to Ancient Greek with possible origins, from further back in time. It wasn't until Germ theory of disease in the 1800's that such ideas were supplanted and largely replaced. Compare the time difference there. For longer of human history, more people generally believed in an inferior kind of science and medical understanding, than the type that we benefit from today. Its not necessarily that humorism was "wrong" or "right", just relatively crude and not as complex or beneficial as Germ theory of disease. Its science, stuff gets supplanted, replaced, updated all the time, and not necessarily because of subjective, opinion based ideologies. 

Current modern science for example, also generally accepts that humans have more than 5 senses. Except if you ask a 70 year old, who has never really paid much attention to much science, how many senses do humans have? They might say, humans have 5, sight, sound, hearing, taste and scent/smell. They might say, we might have 6, with the 6th sense being a bit more paranormal or hard to define. Some sort on special intuition, beyond what our mere human bodies can know through our 5 senses. So how many senses do humans actually have? Well... this is where i might lose some people. It sort of depends. The way I personally like to answer that question, is to say that we do have traditional 5 senses. Historically, across certain human cultures, we often defined our senses, as being five, and usually around as already mentioned, perception/sight/eyes, hearing/ears, taste/eating/flavour, touch/skin/hands/feeling, scent/smell/nose. Except like some colour ideas, perceptions, well even that can get a bit more nuance and complex depending on what culture you are looking at... Regardless then Ill usually explain how in more modern times, scientist have identofied more senses in other animal species, that are more advanced than anything humans might have, but also... well humans have a lot more going on in our bodies, that are a bit more complicated and extensive than someone who lived 800 years ago might realise. So this is reflected now, in some peoples counting of the senses, like to include spatial awareness and balance or say specifically proprioception. There is a sense to do with how we stretch as well. There there is the idea of sensory organs, and sensory modalities and sensory receptors. Plus say like compare our auditory system with vestibular system. 

So to return to the question again, how many senses do we have? Like I said, I'll usually personally answer that we have 5 traditional senses or 5 traditional common senses. Then potentially elaborate that to my current understanding of science, we actually have more than that, but it might depend a little on definition and criteria, than I might mention vestibular and proprioception, and explain a little on what they are. So does that mean we actually have 7? Well again, 5 is a decent general answer, but so is 7 too, or 6 if you want to count 6th sense, but thats more of a strict cultural idea, less a scientific one, but if you do include that, do we have 8? Depends on the kind of person you are, but also some scientists might say between 22 and 33 and some say more, but as with many things, well its about context. How credible ate some of these claims? How much peer review has created consensus, what are they actually trying to communicate. Like its also no coincidence that historically may ideas around the senses also correlated with sensory organs. Except most peoples of the pasts didn't have the technology to understand the microscopic or internal human systems as well as later generations and especially modern scientists. Personally I am a bit dubious to some claims and whilst skeptical, accepting of others (the difference usually being how much science competency is used with explanations). 

Its a bit funny though, to me, because I am yet to encounter anyone who is like "More than 5 senses? When will it stop? What's next 1000 senses? When will the woke mob stop inventing new senses that don't make sense. Humans always only had 5 senses ever, now and forever, its basic science, its what I was taught at school. I think you guys are just trying to be special with all this extra stuff."

Probably a few reasons. Like if you adopt to a team based approach to such subjects, maybe your teams position hasn't reached a consensus yet. Maybe your favourite author isn't claiming that they insist on 5 senses only and not recognising what Canada tries to enforce upon them... Maybe people don't care about senses as much as gender so it doesn't become a polarising political hot button topic etc. Maybe people are more fine with acknowledging its something they may need to learn more about... 

To quickly return to science though, and maybe more specifically scientific history, there has been a lot of stuff we were wrong about, or only just had a crude and ayet to be explored, greater understanding of. A lot of scientific understanding has been paused, delayed, or sent down the wrong track because of the obvious human involvement and that humans can generally be racist, sexist, xenophobic and prone to many biases and flawed types of thinking and decision making. Some of these biases can also be relatively minor or more innocent than others, its why it can be so important to detach ego and character value from such processes to begin with. 

Personally speaking there has been lots I have been mistaken or wrong about, in the past, likely in the present, probably in a future, but I am also personally really good and updating my understanding constantly, and learning to navigate information and ideas, to find the good credible and relatively free of bias types and avoiding bad science, bad science ideas, propaganda etc. 

I know a fair bit about biology (and language/linguistics), I have a little formal education in both beyond high school level, but more the latter. I wouldn't claim to be an expert in either or a career long biologist or anything. Some biologists and people in semi related fields, (anthropology for example), have talked about how newer modern terminology may be required to better convey certain ideas better in regards to ideas around human gender understanding and classification, sort of how sex and gender within scientific understanding  developed, the same as how it developed when it came to race and species, not just because of improved understanding and developments via new info, technology, discovery, but communicating such ideas and reflecting modern sensibilities as well. So much so that a good scientist knowledgable in biology today might seem downright scandalous to a biologist from 100 or 300 years ago. Likewise terminology, understanding and categorisation around certain mental health issues. Certain fields like neurobiology are still relatively new. You guys want to have a sincere conservation about neuroscience and how it relates to transgender people?

My main point, is if you are someone who thinks that science involved here is settled and unchanging and new gender ideology stuff is just that, new ideology stuff, well its complex, and depending on what you mean, you might be going off outdated information and understandings, (think about the idea of binary vs bimodal for example) like many people can. As may some of your understanding on terminology. Its also fine, and not necessarily negatively reflective of your character, sort of depends. Like it would probably take me a few days to have to source all the info for the claims I have made in this one post, and to be honest, I am kind of lazy, plus how many people have actually read this far into my post? But I can if needed. Like there is a lot of expert understanding on such issues, and people explaining in depth, and some are better than others, but also a lot of this may also come down to whether you are operating over a "my team must win" approach, and you think that other people are doing the exact same thing ("the other side is just motivated by winning no matter, in this culture war") or actually a bit more open and sincere. I mean there is a lot of Pride/LGBQT+ that is more on the cultural and social construct side, but that also includes language and some that is more to do with biology, neurobiology, harder sciences, but nothing occurs in a vacuum, and a lot of hard sciences rely on certain subjective ideas, especially as far as communicating them to layman. 

Think about it this way? 700 years ago, you exist back then and your potential belief in humorism is going to be pretty common and considered scientifically accurate and accepted (well, maybe depending on other factors like country, class, etc), in 700 years in the future what are your views on biological sex going to be? Also its not like I look back to people who lived 700 years ago, and think "wrong wrong, incorrect, you are stupid, how could you think it was so simple, you idiot", I can apply context and understanding, they were generally working with they had, and even the best scientists and doctors of that time, wouldn't have known better. Its also not like they were "wrong" or "right", it was just a cruder understanding, less expansive and extensive and understood as it is today, and we have way way more technology to assist us, and our senses... So much so, it helped us discover why/how we might have extra senses... Which is the general explanation for why for thousands of years, cultures usually tended to think we only had 5... Turns out, technology can help us understand and improve on ideas and understanding... Eh eh see what I did there. 

As for the benefits? I really hope I don't have to explain why germ theory greatly advanced the wellbeing, life expectancy and quality of life of many humans. As far as senses? Well it can help us understand other animals better, as well as assist with people who may be disabled in certain ways. Like helping someone hear better is great, but helping them hear better and balance better... Also think macro and micro movements, or technology that can help us out in ways that aren't obvious to us, around illness detection, air detection, technology around more nuance application of touch, taste. How about PRIDE related? Well with animals, it can help a multitude of ways, including preservation and in species aggression, habitation, reproduction efforts. With humans? A lot of better medical treatments, understanding, and less stigma and suspicion and negativity towards those deemed a minority, not significant, "outliers". Also often benefits for minorities, often end up improving the overall treatment and quality of life for those who make up the majority as well as the minority, because the understand and standards of care and practice are lifted across the entire board, so that many can benefit. I could write a whole essay on this. The benefits for CIS and straight people, as far as mental health, personal expression, friendship and community, would be a thing, and has been a thing. The deconstruction of certain gender ideas "like real men don't need therapy", will save many male lives, because its okay to talk to people, friends, partners, health professionals. There is a lot of historic precedent as examples to draw upon. 

In theory, gamers and nerds and geeks, should understand a lot of this better too, because many of us carried a negative stigma, much like many LGBQT+ individuals and since many of us belong to both, we carried both. Heck, some people are out there being a gamer, queer, and ethnic/racial minority, and physically disabled and really poor? Talk about playing life on Steel Path mode to level cap... Depending on what country you live, things have gotten better with time. More people play games now, its a big industry, you don't really get looked down on socially, same as being online, or a comics fan, or into DnD or RPG's or anime, and people don't realise that improvements for LGBQT people hasn't been happening alongside that? With civil unions being allowed, and they gay marriage, and then gay adoption and then the financial and medical benefits that come with greater acceptance. Laws to try and assist as far as harassment, work discrimination etc. Yes people can argue sometimes it goes too far... Like Pixels the movie... or Ready Player One (its the Black Panther for gamers right?). but some countries also have a problem with literal white supremacists who have leaked manifestos about trying to appeal to disaffected gamer youths by weaponising anti-LGBQT rhetoric to entice them to be against the "woke" and to embrace old traditional racial supremacy ideologies. Like thats a real thing that happens! 

We should be standing shoulder to shoulder with each other, 

TL;DR: I virtue signal what a little bit of a biology, history and language education can do to a person, talk about how gay Giraffes are, why you need to make sure your spleen may be contributing too much black bile, and why thats making you cranky, and why some woke nerds with microscopes actually think that our bodies have little tiny creatures inside us, even though obviously I can't see them with my eyes, so do they really exist? Then I explain why my eyes are real, because mirrors are real, and therefore how self reflective some people can be over science, and how they approach it, or to basically say you should be nicer and more considerate to LGBQT+ individuals, but also yourself too and even if you aren't LGBQT+ or know anyone who is, but also, don't view it as a competition or issue with sides if you can. Try to avoid that temptation. You "side" doesn't have to try and win in life, and if history is a precedent then well... 

(PS I do wish I could be more concise). 

[SneakyErvin]

15 hours ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

Sure, you can label whatever you want...but you do so subjectively.  Deciding what's "normal", deciding where the "majority" ends and the "minority" begins, deciding what counts as "functioning"...all of that can only be determined based on subjective opinion.

That highly depends on what it is you look at.

I mean, it is a fact that we are talking about a minority here. Since roughly 10% of Earth's population see themselves as something other than hetero. There is no way to make that a case of subjectiveness, that is factual, concrete and objective. Meaning that the 90% that remains makes up the norm, or what is considered normal. This also goes for "functioning" within biological cases. As in a woman or man born without the ability to reproduce would factually be a person not functioning as they should. Since again, that is a minority while the rest makes up what should be expected i.e the norm or what is normal. And this also goes for a woman not being able to produce milk, she is born with a lacking function that is not a subjective matter. And this is factually rooted in that we are all mammals for instance.

That said, there are still flaws in the norm which goes both ways. 

On one side you have the restrictive conservative approach towards same-sex marriage rooted in what I'd see as dark age ideals, ideas and "morals". Something that shouldnt even be a thing these days because in most places the yoke of dark age religion is seperated from the state. We are all citizens and should have the same opportunities under the protection of the state we live in. Since the state isnt there to uphold some idea that a man on a cloud might get grumpy if two guys or gals or whatever decide to have some fun in the sack or love eachother, or show that love in the shape of marriage. Granted, this wont solve the backwards thinking of religious communities, but it atleast gives the people the opportunity to get recognized as equal citizens in the eyes of the state.

On the other side you have the norm allowing absurd surgical modifications on far far too young individuals etc. Individuals that arent allowed to smoke, drink or make important decisions, not even if their parents give it an "OK", but yet are allowed to go through life alterning and non-reversive proceedures that may wreck them far worse for life, based on the whim of a flimsy parent that want to be "inclusive" or one potentially having Munchausen. Why must an individual be "indoctrinated" into something, why not let them experience life on their own and eventually find the right path for them? To me, a parent should never ever be allowed to make those decisions for their child. It is something that the person themself should decide when they are of the right legal age to make such a decision. Likely at the age somewhere between 18-21.

As a person that prefered to play with female G.I Joe and Marvel characters as a kid I would have been in hell now if I had a parent with incusive ideas that ended up in surgey or treatments. Since I had all the "signs" at that age since I really got into character with these gals. Or that when playing "cowboys and indians" with friends I'd be Psylocke instead of Colossus or one of the other chaps. Turned out later that I was just drawn to the female form and everything it has to offer. Which explains why I also had a hard time pulling my eyes from Psylocke on the cover of the Marvel RPG box, and why I paid little attention to Wolverine and the guys. Which is likely also why I was drawn to "being" her when playing "cowboys and indians", since well I couldnt stop thinking about her, so the closest thing to having her as an imaginary "girlfriend".

And people actually base "treatment" on this type of behavior from their kids, which to me is just bananas on so many levels. Which is why I think that in most cases there isnt anything wrong with the children and it is instead what some people say, an issue with the parents, and that issue being that the parent are suffering from Munchausen. And now with the vast access of the internet and social media, they find problems to attribute to their kids that go beyond the "old school" medical issues. Things that can also secure their place and relevance in their childs future, but afflicting them with never ending issues.

[Pragmatic_2015]

On 2024-06-02 at 9:27 PM, Prexades said:

People gotten tired of companies celebrating a pride month that usually lasts a full year.

Most people don't care what consenting adults do in their bedroom together. But it gets really, really tiresome that some have to put their preferences into everyones face.

 

On 2024-06-02 at 9:48 PM, Genitive said:

We witness the same song and dance every ear. Just ignore the idiots until they get bored.

DE do seem to moderate the steam forums, I saw several threads locked and a few users banned, but you have only that much time in the day.

This......

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

2 hours ago, Dubstowel said:

Never once posted on the forum after years of playing and thousands of hours sunk. That streak ends for me here just to say how tone def and idiotic some of these frankly hateful (or at the most charitable, wilfully ignorant) comments are. There are a million different things I want to say to people who dislike others based purely on their identity (and their expression of it); instead I will just live with the fact that hatefully people will always either be forgotten or change.

 

Welcome to posting on the forums. I wish it could have been under better circumstances, but I appreciate your efforts to post about something important. 

I personally tend to be on the more charitable side as far as interpreting others. I think that there are relatively smart greedy ethically compromised people out there who get into power and spend a lot of time and energy trying to convince your average folk that some random trans person is the problem and threat to society. That some random girl on social media who is fascinated by neopronouns is the real threat to democracy or something... People who might have an internal intuition of not really understanding something, get that weaponised into a deeper disgust and hatred and now they are in a culture war, that the original person benefits from. 

Except exactly as you say will happen, since well a lot of smart greedy ethically compromised people in power don't really actually care too much about others or the future, they just want to have super orgies in giant mansions with expensive cool drugs, and then die. Its why climate change is going to end up causing a lot of needless damage, death and destruction, but people in positions of power to prevent it, will likely die before that happens, and people of the future will look back on Internet archive programs and see people disputing its existence (actually just doing that now is a bit of a trip, looking back at people talking about that issue 10 to 15 years ago, and further back in news media etc). 

Transphobic, homophobic people, many will be cranky dinosaurs when they die, and we'll have a new stereotype of the old racist grandparent who said inappropriate things, "Back in my day, we had Ellen, and thats all we ever really needed. Don't get all this extra "GBQTIA", should have just started and ended with lesbians. Did I ever tell you kids about Two Girls one Cup? You see, as what was the style at that time..."

Anyway even though I am on the charitable side, I can't really dispute anyone who has stronger words to leverage at others over this topic. Many people have been disowned by family friends, physically, emotionally, mentally hurt, abused, faced discrimination at school or work, and some people in this thread are like "That doesn't happen anymore, maybe in the past" like... some people just really don't know how lucky they are, and if they have faced their own trauma for entirely different reasons, also don't really know how to empathise/sympathise with others over some small differences. 

All the best, take care! 

[Xylena_Lazarow]

On 2024-06-02 at 7:27 AM, Prexades said:

But it gets really, really tiresome that some have to put their preferences into everyones face.

It absolutely does, as straight folks have been constantly pushing their straight preferences into my lesbian face for 4 decades now.

[SneakyErvin]

16 minutes ago, (PSN)slightconfuzzled said:

Except exactly as you say will happen, since well a lot of smart greedy ethically compromised people in power don't really actually care too much about others or the future, they just want to have super orgies in giant mansions with expensive cool drugs, and then die. Its why climate change is going to end up causing a lot of needless damage, death and destruction, but people in positions of power to prevent it, will likely die before that happens, and people of the future will look back on Internet archive programs and see people disputing its existence (actually just doing that now is a bit of a trip, looking back at people talking about that issue 10 to 15 years ago, and further back in news media etc). 

Just wanna say a few things about this. We shouldnt put all the blame on the rich people that love hookers and blow. Because we also have rich people that complain about not enough being done for the climate while doing nothing to actually change it themselves, like Greta. She is at a prime age to actually educate herself in order to actively try to achieve change by working within the field(s), but she rather travels the world to demonstrate and be disruptive while costing the nations she is in tax money when she gets arrested over and over. The funny part is that she is also what she likely complains about in addition to the climate, a so called priviledged person since she comes from not only a rich family, she comes from a celebrity family.

Then we have the poor versions of her aswell that probably have no clue that they cause more harm than good to the environment and climate when they have their sitting-line demonstrations on the highways, blocking traffic, resulting in cars, trucks and busses just standing there and pumping out exhaust fumes while getting nowhere. Which then also requires *woop* *woop* to jump into their cars and drive through all the city traffic all the way out to the highways in order to arrest these people for unlawful gatherings. Which not only sends more fumes into the air, it also costs the city absurd amount of money taken from their yearly budget. Which then effects the budget of the coming year, since well... due to their actions, law enforcement seem to need X amount of cash to handle things, meaning they get that cash. However, if those nincompoops hadnt held their unlawful gathering on the highway, the police might have needed less funding in the coming year, funding that might have then possibly been free to place on some eco project instead for said city.

Not that those that deny it are any better. Right now I dont think anyone is going about it correctly. They are too busy arguing among themselves, and the moment a change in power occurs, whatever project the former had started, the new will replace with their own, never really finishing either. It's like here, one side wants to vomit out electric cars, but forget that we lack places to charge them. Then the other side wants to focus on nuclear power to give us time to expand our infrastructure elsewhere, like building charging station to prepare for a wider introduction of electric vehicles. But neither side is really thinking about what needs to be done eventually with all the used batteries.

Then there are also those that promote the whole electric industry since it is cleaner and there by better than oil, but they also ignore the working conditions between the two. All the crap that is needed to make a battery comes from anywhere where there is a mine that can provide it, which includes anything from the most underdeveloped countires all the way to the top, where you have people working for scraps in one place and proper pay in the other. With oil you can nearly guarantee fair pay no matter where it is drilled, with mostly good benefits and working conditions aswell (if you consider working at a place that may literally blow up as being a good working condition ).

Personally I'm just on the "I dont give a #*!%" side, since I dont plan on having children that will then have children that might grow up in some real life Interstellar world. I'll be long gone when dear mother eventually kicks the bucket or goes "ok fam, enough is enough, get the #*!% out!" to the human race. Or who knows, mother might have made a long distance call and the aliens are on the way?

[Prexades]

vor 50 Minuten schrieb Xylena_Lazarow:

It absolutely does, as straight folks have been constantly pushing their straight preferences into my lesbian face for 4 decades now.

Ah yes, the hetero pride parades, waiving flags, pushing their sexual practices in everyones face.

[Xylena_Lazarow]

Just now, Prexades said:

Ah yes, the hetero pride parades, waiving flags, pushing their sexual practices in everyones face.

"you just haven't met the right guy yet"

"but how are you going to have kids then"

"which one of you is the man in the relationship"

"that's a sinful lifestyle, you need a man"

"oh you have a girlfriend? that doesn't bother me, we can still date"

"oh you have a girlfriend? let's have a th..."

Not to mention all the flags and symbols (religious and political) explicitly associated with rigid adherence to heterosexuality (and hatred of queerness).

There are states in the USA where it's now safer to fly a nazi flag than a rainbow flag.

[Zimzala]

Is it really so hard to just accept people, as opposed to labelling them in an attempt to rank them in terms of 'right and wrong, 'normal or abnormal' based around what humans they find attractive as partners?

Seriously.

20 minutes ago, Prexades said:

Ah yes, the hetero pride parades, waiving flags, pushing their sexual practices in everyones face.

Happens all the time. Even in the Fantasy Fest parade in Key West ( a gay mecca ) there are as many if not more hetero people pushing their sexual practices. Look at most all movies, plays, porn, and the very people here thinking they are being discriminated against because someone else wants to be who they are.

Burlesque shows come to mind. Thunder From Down Under. Toga parties even.

For a group of people that are trying to act educated, those trying to suppress others and promote the idea that non-cis people should be shunned and not allowed a voice seem woefully uninformed and choose to be willfully ignorant of the real world.

Is it really so hard to accept others as they are rather than how you think they should be?

I'll post it here again.

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them.

Is it so hard to love other humans?

Edited June 7 by Zimzala
words are hard

[Prexades]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb Xylena_Lazarow:

"you just haven't met the right guy yet"

"but how are you going to have kids then"

"which one of you is the man in the relationship"

"that's a sinful lifestyle, you need a man"

"oh you have a girlfriend? that doesn't bother me, we can still date"

"oh you have a girlfriend? let's have a th..."

Not to mention all the flags and symbols (religious and political) explicitly associated with rigid adherence to heterosexuality (and hatred of queerness).

There are states in the USA where it's now safer to fly a nazi flag than a rainbow flag.

Should we start comparing notes?

"If you don't get a well paying job no girl will ever love you!"

"You haven't married yet?"

Every effing article in left leaning publications start with a rant about 'white men'.

"Sorry, I don't date poor guys"

Even  after broken a relationship just wanting time for yourself, getting labeled as "incel"

Oh and the 'white male privilege' of being guilty of everything and having to apologize for existing.

Edited June 7 by Prexades

[Caerith]

People really do pretend all the reasons for Pride never happened or continue to happen.

[Zimzala]

5 minutes ago, Prexades said:

Should we start comparing notes?

"If you don't get a well paying job no girl will ever love you!"

"You haven't married yet?"

Every effing article in left leaning publications start with a rant about 'white men'.

"Sorry, I don't date poor guys"

Even  after broken a relationship just wanting time for yourself, getting labeled as "incel"

Oh and the 'white male privilege' of being guilty of everything and having to apologize for existing.

So because you don't like that some people choose to oppress and denigrate others over their opinions - "If you don't get a well paying job no girl will ever love you!", you think the answer is to oppress others that you dislike?

Are you reading what you are typing?

Using broad strokes as if they are facts "Every effing article in left leaning publications start with a rant about 'white men'" helps your argument not-at-all.

Because you are mad some people speak from an uninformed POV, you think that no one can speak about things with which you don't agree?

Really?

[Prexades]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Zimzala:

So because you don't like that some people choose to oppress and denigrate others over their opinions - "If you don't get a well paying job no girl will ever love you!", you think the answer is to oppress others that you dislike?

Are you reading what you are typing?

Using broad strokes as if they are facts "Every effing article in left leaning publications start with a rant about 'white men'" helps your argument not-at-all.

Because you are mad some people speak from an uninformed POV, you think that no one can speak about things with which you don't agree?

Really?

You are not being oppressed when people tell you that a month long parade is too much.

[Zimzala]

11 minutes ago, Prexades said:

You are not being oppressed when people tell you that a month long parade is too much.

Your willful ignorance over the fact that heterosexuality is celebrated in everyone's faces in the western world 365 days a year is ok, but not for Pride to last 30 days just shows us your intolerance and willingness to promote propaganda.

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

5 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Just wanna say a few things about this. We shouldnt put all the blame on the rich people that love hookers and blow. Because we also have rich people that complain about not enough being done for the climate while doing nothing to actually change it themselves, like Greta. She is at a prime age to actually educate herself in order to actively try to achieve change by working within the field(s), but she rather travels the world to demonstrate and be disruptive while costing the nations she is in tax money when she gets arrested over and over. The funny part is that she is also what she likely complains about in addition to the climate, a so called priviledged person since she comes from not only a rich family, she comes from a celebrity family.

 

I personally don't know much about Greta Thunberg, my apologies, to say much about that. 

I would say though, that there are many many science advocators, science communicators, science entertainers and science popularisers, whose contributions to science, the sciences have been massive, valuable and instrumental. Whilst they may not have worked directly in the respective field itself more directly, or maybe they did but their contribution was relatively small and humble, their ability to highlight, bring awareness, and communicate such issues and ideas, would be significant, even if potentially hard to quantify or measure. Like and from Isaac Asimov, Douglas Adams Carl Sagan, Bill Bryson, Arthur C. Clarke, Richard Feynman, Bill Nye, Brian Cox, Richard Dawkins to Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michio Kaku, Stephen Jay Gould, Jamie Hyneman/Adam Savage (Mythbusters), Steve Irwin, Hank Green, Julia Galef. 

A lot of those names are scientists or involved in science, and some of their direct contributions are bigger than others, and some of those names are just authors, writers, or television or internet personalities, but... many of them have inspired and fostered and nurtured the fascination, appreciation and desire to know and do science in many many many people. Like some of the people I named, ehh, personally think they are a bit overrated and or have some disagreeable opinions, or I think their knowledge on some topics are lacking, some I think are underrated, some I think have good books, some I think have average books... but I would be weary of downplaying their contributions just because they might have been more on the awareness side of science as opposed to first hand personal contributions (though you obviously have your bests like Feyman and Sagan who did a lot of both). 

 

31 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Then we have the poor versions of her aswell that probably have no clue that they cause more harm than good to the environment and climate when they have their sitting-line demonstrations on the highways, blocking traffic, resulting in cars, trucks and busses just standing there and pumping out exhaust fumes while getting nowhere. Which then also requires *woop* *woop* to jump into their cars and drive through all the city traffic all the way out to the highways in order to arrest these people for unlawful gatherings. Which not only sends more fumes into the air, it also costs the city absurd amount of money taken from their yearly budget. Which then effects the budget of the coming year, since well... due to their actions, law enforcement seem to need X amount of cash to handle things, meaning they get that cash. However, if those nincompoops hadnt held their unlawful gathering on the highway, the police might have needed less funding in the coming year, funding that might have then possibly been free to place on some eco project instead for said city.

 

Those people aren't that big an issue to me, as when strictly speaking you have BP, as in multi billion dollar company spending large amounts of money to Ogilvy (owned by WPP plc) a large and notable  advertising, marketing, and public relations agency to popularise the idea of "carbon footprints" to essentially attempt to shift responsibility and therefore blame on to the random everyday individual and further away from their contribution, which is disproportionately massive. Fossil fuel and oil companies routinely studied and reported to have incredibly large contributions to global emissions (the exact figures and percentages can vary depending on which study or research, but the main simple point being they as companies release a whole lot of carbon pollution and often try to avoid responsibility and accountability, and have the money and influence to try and blame others. 

So on the scale of what needs to be focused on the most, some random people protesting and being a disruption is on the lower end, then a bit higher you get your Superbowl celebrities, who fly lots of places but don't actually do much to offset their "carbon footprint" and then way way more importantly and the actual biggest problem creators you have like a certain specific 100 companies who collectively responsible for like the heavy majority of GHG emissions. 

 

50 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Not that those that deny it are any better. Right now I dont think anyone is going about it correctly.

 

I somewhat agree. Just also that a lot of people lack the education, power, knowledge, understanding, time, influence, social or general connections, wealth, money or impunity to do much. Like some people may have some of those things, but its rare they have all of those things, and often if they have all of those things, its because they have a favourable socioeconomic background, were relatively fortunate or lucky, are or are a bit sociopathic, just a little, enough to not stand out too much, wearing a nice suit and tie, and usually they won't have the empathy or compassion to want to do anything, when they can instead grow power and influence. 

Change can often take time, especially good change for a lot of people, and even longer for everyone. Takes time for even good science to start being pop science, before even the most anti-scientific people in society eventually come around too. Like there is so much stuff that we figured out decades ago, that still are being argued about online. 

 

57 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Personally I'm just on the "I dont give a #*!%" side, since I dont plan on having children that will then have children that might grow up in some real life Interstellar world. I'll be long gone when dear mother eventually kicks the bucket or goes "ok fam, enough is enough, get the #*!% out!" to the human race. Or who knows, mother might have made a long distance call and the aliens are on the way?

 

In some ways I am the same, but in other ways I think its a matter of context. I think homelessness is a sad and unfortunate reality, and I can't personally solve it, but I can volunteer and used to when I was younger. Same with some issues around mental health, domestic abuse. Can people become desensitised, especially to stuff like Climate Change? Yeah I think we can, and do, especially when there isn't much a lot of us can do by ourselves, but I try to put it in context as well. I won't let BP guilt trip me for not having a "carbon lite diet", I won't really blame people who have cars, because they need to work for a living, even though I personally walk most places, and to close food places, I will blame certain celebrities and wish many countries weren't so celebrity obsessed, but its a relativity things too. If I focus too much on the bad, I won't have enough energy to help some people closer by, who might benefit a lot from a bit of help. 

I don't plan on having children either heh, already had to raise some children that weren't mine, I'm good! At most I might adopt if i have a partner who really wants that experience. I'll try and argue we should adopt a shelter cat or dog instead though probably. 

Cheers! 

[Prexades]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb Zimzala:

Your willful ignorance over the fact that heterosexuality is celebrated in everyone's faces in the western world 365 days a year is ok, but not for Pride to last 30 days just shows us your intolerance and willingness to promote propaganda.

Heterosexuality existing is not a 365 celebration. You can also be gay during the same time period 365 days and getting an extra day for it every 4 years. With streaming services you can perfectly avoid anything hetero. A man and a women kissing is not nearly on the same level as a pride parade.

Regarding propaganda, I am seeing lately far too much from your side.

[Zimzala]

1 minute ago, Prexades said:

Heterosexuality existing is not a 365 celebration. You can also be gay during the same time period 365 days and getting an extra day for it every 4 years. With streaming services you can perfectly avoid anything hetero. A man and a women kissing is not nearly on the same level as a pride parade.

Regarding propaganda, I am seeing lately far too much from your side.

You can be straight and remain straight for the 30 days of Pride.

And?

Regardless of your willful ignorance to turn a blind eye to the constant heterosexual nature of advertising, entertainment, and literature in our western culture, it's there, it's in our faces all the time, it cannot be avoided unless one simply wants to never interact with the world.

You have the freedom to not watch that Pride parade, you know that, right? No one is forcing you to watch, unlike virtually any musical performance and entertainment for the masses filled with heterosexual imagery, including WF. 

The propaganda to which I refer is trying to say that heterosexuality is not on display, when it's right there and much of it quite graphic like the posters outside the porn shop my mother-in-law sees everyday, far beyond kisses - which BTW don't have to be sexual in nature.

Your argument has no logic, only intolerance.

You try to nit-pick a few things that offend your personal sensibilities and then tell everyone they must stop doing those things, which is literally the definition of intolerance.

I tolerate people with your outlook, even as I pity them, but you don't see me telling entertainers to stop flashing heterosexuality at me.

[Merkranire]

Didn’t expect to actually learn stuff from this topic

[Venus-Venera]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Dubstowel:

Never once posted on the forum after years of playing and thousands of hours sunk. That streak ends for me here just to say how tone def and idiotic some of these frankly hateful (or at the most charitable, wilfully ignorant) comments are. There are a million different things I want to say to people who dislike others based purely on their identity (and their expression of it); instead I will just live with the fact that hatefully people will always either be forgotten or change.

it has probably always been like this on the planet. new discoveries are received very negatively by the majority. in the past, people who claimed that the earth was round were even burned alive.
and people of a certain age can hardly understand new information. that's why older people can't get on the internet at all and are even afraid of it.
it was the same for me. but with a smartphone. I had a lot of trouble with it and hated it at first.

so the topic is actually much more complex than it seems.
or rather, the picture below used to be the truth from the last instance for many people:

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

Straight people pushing their sexual preferences and practices into others faces, isn't the same as someone claiming that their are straight parades. I would say thats obvious but, well... That being said you can have somewhat similar examples, on radically different sides of the political spectrum. For example Boobs on Bikes is enjoyed by many a straight man, lesbian. Its basically just a parade, where people are allowed to get their boobs out, on motorbikes. Men and woman, but in some places, countries, etc woman being topless is a bit more controversial and considered indecent, and in some places even illegal. That being said, men are also allowed and encouraged to get their boobs out too, pecs, etc if they want to. You just have to be on some sort of bike, no dirty gross, scooters allowed. So I imagine several straight woman and gay men, also get to enjoy the male boob on bikes. 

There were also and sometimes are Slutwalks. I mean usually the idea there is to support victims of sexual assault, rape, aka slut shaming, because contrary to some peoples ideas, but clothing or acting promiscuous isn't actually a factor in why people get raped, and its not an invitation for unwanted sexual advances either. Lots of straight people participate in that, sometimes viewed as an idea more important to woman, predominantly, but many men will show support and unity and participate as well, though also a lot of LGBQT+ folk too, crazy, its almost like LGBQT+ people often support straight CIS people over stuff too if the reason is important. Like how many CIS straight people also support Pride and LGBQT people. Next thing you know, cats and dogs will coexist or something right? 

That being said, on the radical other side of the spectrum, well you'll also have Ku Klux Klan rallies. Sometimes they don't need a big flag (The Duke Flag), to let you know what their deal is, since they have pretty... distinct clothes, especially their pointy hats. They like to have parades sometimes too, you can smell them a mile away, just look for the giant burning crosses. I suppose you could say "well they aren't marching for straightness... Just the racial purity of white supremacy, traditional family values, against the threat of immigrants, people of colour, leftist ideas, Superman, antifamily ideas, LGBQT+. I would say, that if you feel really really strong about being heterosexual, so much so that you want to vilify Pride parades, and LGBQT+ people... I mean, you might not disagree with all that other stuff... but technically speaking... as far as displays of straight pride goes... I would say you have to be fast though, KKK in most places is continuing to decline. Not necessarily that their ideas aren't still around in a different form, but its like a lot of them are rebranding for some strange reason. Crazy right? You think they would be happy with their public perception, since KKK members are really easily to recognise when they wear the outfit, but ehh, who am I to say or judge? 

My humble opinion? Join a Pride parade, because a lot of LGBQT+ people will be extra impressed that you, a straight CIS person, is there to support other people out of compassion and empathy, and solidarity, and even if you are either straight, or CIS or straight and CIS, they'll generally want to recognise and respect you too. Alternatively, Boobs on Bikes and Slutwalks are also pretty fun and interesting too. Also don't actually go to a KKK rally please, that bit was rhetorical and a joke. Usually I would think that would be obvious, but this thread and some comments... 

[vixenpixel]

3 hours ago, (PSN)slightconfuzzled said:

(PS I do wish I could be more concise). 

Me too, what the hell man. Just drops an essay down. 

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

6 minutes ago, vixenpixel said:

Me too, what the hell man. Just drops an essay down. 

 

Hah yeah fair, very fair. 

I just really like science, science history, LGBQT history, animals, including humans, parades, etc I can talk about such things for hours. 

Did you know a German zoo once tried to bred some Humboldt penguins? They are endangered species you see, so makes sense to want to try and get them to mate, but the Humboldt penguins they had were male, so they had to important some sexy hot Swedish female Humboldt penguins. I bet they were really tall, tan and blonde. For penguins!! The German Humboldt penguins gay bromance was way too strong though, they wouldn't let some sleazy hot sexy Swedish penguins get in the way of their loyalty and bond together, so they held out and stayed loyal. As all people who love each other should be, don't throw away real love for a cheap hook up! 

Still a better love story than Twilight too! 

Take care and all the best to you! Cheers! 

[vixenpixel]

Personally I support DE and pride LGBTQ parade whatever fully. I haven't gone to a parade though but that's because I don't really feel comfortable in big public spaces with lots and lots of people. I also don't like that it's always in the summer so it's always going to be sweaty as hell and just a throng of people everywhere. Brrrr. It's like a nightmare just imagining it. But the thing is that I wouldn't even notice that it was pride if DE didn't remind me every year and I mean... It's just free stuff in the marketplace... How can anyone object to this when it's their own choice to be bothered by the actual parade or not. Like you don't need to have it "in your face" because you literally don't have to go look at it. You have to try and be bothered by it to let it bother you. You have to literally make an effort to get yourself mad about it. It's so ridiculous. And like, even if your road to work leads right by the place where they have a big advertisement sign with a rainbow on and this happens to trigger you a bit, how little self control do you have to have to let it bother you to such an extent that you let it occupy your thoughts for more than a second?

Many, if not most of people belonging to the LGBTQ group have been treated poorly in society, I know this for a fact growing up. You see it all the time. Look, when there is peace time they don't stop having a military because it's peace right now, if anything they reinforce the military so they can keep being at peace more efficiently. For the same reason, abolishing a pride parade because western society is not arresting gay people anymore is simply not an option for the longevity of a movement based on peace and love.

In fact, I feel like it's abit trendy right now to be an outspoken right-wing conservative anti-everything-lgbtq-but-in-particular trans rights. Most often, I find, these individuals ambiguously swear themselves to the grand ol' Church of overly cherry-picking which can be of any religion and many times is comprised of people who never go to church. I think that it's very easy to rest back in the comfort of ignorance when you have a big group of ignorant buddies making common cause. I hope this horrible trend is a last gasp effort before the tide of equality washes over the world.

In closing, supporting a movement based on peace and love, can't be wrong. 

Edited June 7 by vixenpixel

[vixenpixel]

59 minutes ago, (PSN)slightconfuzzled said:

 

Hah yeah fair, very fair. 

I just really like science, science history, LGBQT history, animals, including humans, parades, etc I can talk about such things for hours. 

Did you know a German zoo once tried to bred some Humboldt penguins? They are endangered species you see, so makes sense to want to try and get them to mate, but the Humboldt penguins they had were male, so they had to important some sexy hot Swedish female Humboldt penguins. I bet they were really tall, tan and blonde. For penguins!! The German Humboldt penguins gay bromance was way too strong though, they wouldn't let some sleazy hot sexy Swedish penguins get in the way of their loyalty and bond together, so they held out and stayed loyal. As all people who love each other should be, don't throw away real love for a cheap hook up! 

Still a better love story than Twilight too! 

Take care and all the best to you! Cheers! 

I bet that penguin was smoking!

[(PSN)Unstar]

2 hours ago, Merkranire said:

Didn’t expect to actually learn stuff from this topic

This might be the most valuable post in this thread for me personally; it's genuinely refreshing to be reminded that even when it might feel like our words are having no effect on their intended audience, there are others who can read them and get some manner of benefit from them.

_{(in no way assuming my words were the ones that taught you, but it's a good reminder all the same)}