• Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    I don’t like this argument.

    You’re advising

    "not pursuing or discussing what the truth might be, because of political opponents".

    Political opponents who want you un-existing either way, and will use any excuse and lie available to barely mask that hate of theirs.

    Neither those people’s “understanding”, nor their amount of available means to mask their hate, really affects trans people’s freedom.

    The "average Joe" can't be "won over" either, because they don't care. Until something happens, to make them care. Like an a acquaintance or loved one being involved.

    But in the off-chance that they can, (without being personally affected), they will be won over by recognising a truth of the world.

    Victory by “reasonable vibes”, is achieved by reaffirming what’s already in someone else’s head. It’s only a victory if you’re trying to not change something.

    So seek the truth. Don’t appeal to the good nature of the oppressor.

    (tap)

    for more, at least in Jerboa.

    • soloner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      I don’t like it either but it’s a pragmatic argument. I think you’re a bit out of touch with how society can move forward if we introduce polarizing ideas. We haven’t wrangled how trans women fit into sports. You really think the “let’s make it a choice” argument is going to help with that?

      Plenty of average joes are fine with gay people now, not racist, not misogynistic. We will get there as a society if we try to find common ground. Like I said, it may take another 20 years to sort out how to be equitable to a very marginalized group of people (maybe longer). This trans is a choice rhetoric will prolong that because it diminished any common ground that we are starting to form.