Minority acceptance vs embracing (Gay/Bi/Xdress example)

[StevenM]

The whole question sure stirs up our personal beliefs and opinions, and is hard to make any logic out of.

Quantifiably, how much discomfort is involved to each opposing sides, and where is the fulcrum of the scale that will compare? What solution could have been practically applied to distribute discomfort equally, to make things..... fair?

I'm looking into and trying to understand Architect's viewpoint. There are men, who quite simply, don't want to dance with men, and when someone comes along and says "Put up with it, and just do it", there is a level of discomfort. Yes, we have opinions about how these people should feel (It's all just opinions after all), the fact of the matter is that there is discomfort.

The same as this girl who quite simply didn't want to dance with men, and may have discomfort being told to "Just conform and do it".

So someone has to give a little to be 'fair' I guess. The outcome of this situation, most of the people 'gived a little' and allowed the girl to be in a role of a man. What's heartwarming about this situation, is that it wasn't an 149 against 1 situation, but rather a large portion of people found it within themselves to broaden up and include her, not leaving her feel left out. It was nice to have people to back her up.

Was it fair?

 

[redbaron]

Because there's a difference between discriminating and participating. I don't discriminate against gays, but I don't want to dance or date men.

You'd actually take issue with simply dancing with another male? It's 2014 not 1914. Not to mention, who says a man is gay just because he dances with another man?

This mentality highlights exactly what I said in the previous post. The only people for whom this is a problem is people who want to discriminate in the first place. For you dancing is an implicitly sexual act, so you discriminate between the gender of your dance partner based on which sex you're attracted to.

What about dancing with a woman who you don't find attractive? Still confronting?

Dancing doesn't need to be sexual. I've danced with other men and it was fun. We even held hands and it was quite enjoyable. Likewise I've danced with women I didn't necessarily find sexually attractive and still had fun.

Again - it's only a problem if you're someone who wants to discriminate in the first place.

 

[Cherry Cola]

^Very Agree

 

[StevenM]

The only people for whom this is a problem is people who want to discriminate in the first place.

I want to argue that. There is another reason.

A different possibility of a male feeling awkward and uncomfortable dancing with another male, is that there are social influences, a possibility of criticism and being shamed from others. The internal conflict is taking criticism from other people, while perhaps not minding male-male dancing personally.

*The fear is really about standing out differently from the standards of other people.

 

[Cherry Cola]

I want to argue that. There is another reason.

A different possibility of a male feeling awkward and uncomfortable dancing with another male, is that there are social influences, a possibility of criticism and being shamed from others. The internal conflict is taking criticism from other people, while perhaps not minding male-male dancing personally.

*The fear is really about standing out differently from the standards of other people.

Sorry for being terribly redundant.

Let's not try to advance culture, it may make people uncomfortable and there will be occasions of awkwardness, so it doesn't really matter if it's good in the long run

Your line of reasoning is let's not be that guy ^ Have a little balls and sympathy? You can't dance with a guy for fear of being shunned, but have you ever thought of how much shunning gay people have to withstand from the same people you fear? Sorry but if you can't dance with another man you're helping to perpetuate the culture that gives the conservative assholes of the world a voice, I really I'm accusing a lot of people including my past self by saying so but meh.. it's kinda hard a fact to escape.

 

[crippli]

*The fear is really about standing out differently from the standards of other people.

Excactly. And this effect is not to be underestimated. "Xdress" Around 90% are heterosexual alledgedly. Almost always this happens inside the house, as is fine with the wife. The crossing of the line is if he walk outside, then divorce, regardless of the passion and the love in the bedroom. Those are the rules.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Let's not try to advance culture, it may make people uncomfortable and there will be occasions of awkwardness, so it doesn't really matter if it's good in the long run

Spoiler

Your line of reasoning is let's not be that guy ^ Have a little balls and sympathy? You can't dance with a guy for fear of being shunned, but have you ever thought of how much shunning gay people have to withstand from the same people you fear? Sorry but if you can't dance with another man you're helping to perpetuate the culture that gives the conservative assholes of the world a voice, I really I'm accusing a lot of people including my past self by saying so but meh.. it's kinda hard a fact to escape.

You are setting a really bad example here, comparing that person and someone not trying to force oneself to participate in a dance.

That guy on the picture is just a symbol, the act of greeting the leader of the ruling party is not a bad thing in itself. And we don't know what that guy did with his life later, he was obedient enough to wear the appropriate state funded uniform and to listen to the whole thing.

It doesn't follow that when a male doesn't want to dance with a male, it is comparable to the upkeeping of atrocious totalitarian system.

What do you have to say to a person that only dances with people they find attractive? That they discriminate?

Cannot this be considered normal behaviour that when a male or female don't feel the attraction they wouldn't choose to participate in the act?

And I want to connect this to the whole ritual that is a formal dance that follows basic protocol, much like when courting a potential mate and the fact that these are kids dancing and physical contact and hormonal reactions are a part of sexuality.

Sexual attraction is a biological reaction and I don't see how we can speak of discriminating here, when it's what attraction does.

Not to mention, how far it's gotten from the participant to his parent in this discussion.

 

[StevenM]

but have you ever thought of how much shunning gay people have to withstand from the same people you fear?

Yes, I've thought about it. Trust me, your side of the debate, I can agree in an instant, I have no troubles understanding what you mean. It's too easy for me to choose your side in this debate, because I am gay.

In a debate, I do my best to understand the side that my feelings and opinions don't agree with, and see if I can determine some kind of realistic argument for that side. It's a little hard for me understand too, because I have also danced with girls and still had fun.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Looking back at my post I write "you" way too much, sorry about that, I'm just frustrated by that mentality because it doesn't enable progress and when I write "you" I mean it in general plural sense.

@Blarraun: cba to defend the picture, don't feel like you got the point of it

I think that only dancing with people you're attracted to could be considered kinda discriminatory. Lot's of people dance with people they aren't attracted to, balls kinda require that they do. As I said earlier I don't think anyone should be forced to dance with anyone, but if you go to a dance class where you're gonna be dancing with a bunch of people for sure but refuse to dance with someone because of their sex I'd say you're in the wrong.

Yeah you could see the dance as part of a courting ritual and yes there's going to be situations where people are made uncomfortable, but the pains we have to go through for a better world are nothing compared to the pains that people endure in the current one.

 

[Absurdity]

I think that only dancing with people you're attracted to could be considered kinda discriminatory. Lot's of people dance with people they aren't attracted to, balls kinda require that they do. As I said earlier I don't think anyone should be forced to dance with anyone, but if you go to a dance class where you're gonna be dancing with a bunch of people for sure but refuse to dance with someone because of their sex I'd say you're in the wrong.

If you like to dance it probably isn't a problem for you to dance with people regardless of their attractiveness because you enjoy the activity itself. But if you're like me the only thing that makes dancing bearable is dancing with someone attractive. If someone wants to shame me for being "discriminatory" because of that I'll just lol.

but the pains we have to go through for a better world are nothing compared to the pains that people endure in the current one.

The better world isn't necessarily coming, and using utopia as an excuse to shame people directly for their sins of possibly maybe making someone uncomfortable because they raised an eyebrow when social protocol was broken is monstrously hypocritical.

 

[crippli]

Cannot this be considered normal behaviour that when a male or female don't feel the attraction they wouldn't choose to participate in the act?

It can be be very uncomfortable to be rejected. So much that if the option of rejection is present, they will not participate at all.

I think the focus should be on the dance. As is seen in this thread it is the minority that dances for sexual excitement.

It seems odd to me that they will only dance in the possibility of becoming sexually exited. What is the problem of giving 5 minutes of ones life to another person without getting anything in return? Perhaps one will also get something without realizing that one does. In fact one does, as one will at least be exercising. Gloves can be used if one is scared of being contaminated.

 

[Cherry Cola]

If you like to dance it probably isn't a problem for you to dance with people regardless of their attractiveness because you enjoy the activity itself. But if you're like me the only thing that makes dancing bearable is dancing with someone attractive. If someone wants to shame me for being "discriminatory" because of that I'll just lol.



The better world isn't necessarily coming, and using utopia as an excuse to shame people directly for their sins of possibly maybe making someone uncomfortable because they raised an eyebrow when social protocol was broken is monstrously hypocritical.

So basically because of your Fi sentiment and personal experience in life "just lol"? Because there's not an inkling of an argument there.

And using fatalism as an excuse for not trying is worse than anything else.

 

[Absurdity]

So basically because of your Fi sentiment and personal experience in life "just lol"? Because there's not an inkling of an argument there.

And using fatalism as an excuse for not trying is worse than anything else.

You're using rhetorical shame tactics in response to slights that you perceive against people you don't know on their behalf and then using utopia as the excuse for your behavior. I just lol because it's absolute insanity and I don't care if people try to use it against me.

And not believing in utopia doesn't make me a fatalist.

 

[StevenM]

I guess it can all be just summed as:

In dancing, it is 'better' if the feelings are mutual.

 

[The Gopher]

It's very easy to not accept people or be bigoted towards people who are doing something you dislike. (see Archy and Cola ) The problem with utopia is currently everyone has a different ideal and generally they involve people acting a certain way.

I'll dance with who ever I want to dance with, and I'll dance the female part, in male clothing. SHOCKING! Okay to be fair it's mainly because I don't know how to dance and following is so much easier. I also happen to prefer male clothing generally and just so you don't assume I dance with male and female. I shouldn't have to say that to have a valid opinion in the debate however.

I discriminate all the time. In doing so I hang out with less SJ's than most people. It also means I prefer orange juice over apple juice and thin people over fat people. Oh dear, I have the power to chose what I like and dislike. How horrible. Do I impose this power over anyone? Nope. I simply decline to drink apple juice if I don't feel like it.

Does the apple juice feel bad I don't want to drink it? Maybe (okay the actual answer is no mainly because it doesn't have a brain) but if it does then that sucks for the apple juice. I don't hate apple juice, I don't pour it down the sink, there is just too many SJ *cough* too much apple juice in this place so I prefer something different.

I am "that guy" I do what I want to, which is terrifying (thankfully I don't want to kill anyone) but people are allowed to care about shunning. Sure they may not have it as bad but people going hungry in my country still care about going hungry even if it isn't as bad as Africa. I don't think we should shame or shun people for being who they are (see cherry and Archy ) but technically we are allowed to.

---------------

I'm terribly sorry I know it's a serious topic but I couldn't help being sarcastic in that.

Edit: oh yeah no problem with the girl as long as people are free to reject her.

 

[Cherry Cola]

You're using rhetorical shame tactics in response to slights that you perceive against people you don't know on their behalf and then using utopia as the excuse for your behavior. I just lol because it's absolute insanity and I don't care if people try to use it against me.

And not believing in utopia doesn't make me a fatalist.

Yeah I'm using shaming tactics so? The rest of what you said isn't true unless you are unable to see the wider implications of this topic, limiting it to the dance class mentioned in the OP.

In any case, I made a case. You were like Fi sentiment>done. That's insanity.

Oh and you're not a fatalist? Well I'm not saying we should aim for Utopia either. But apparently I'm imagining a Utopia because I think we could live in a world where a man dancing with another man isn't a big deal. There's a large group of people in the west who aren't homophobic, but will still support practices that are and are unwilling to change arbitrary traditions because it makes them uncomfortable. That's apparent in this thread too.

It's really weird how in this topic, there is no need to make any sense, here it is okay to simply go with your instincts. Classic NT.

 

[TBerg]

Conservative utopianism is found in Plato's Republic. Liberal utopianism is found in the Communist Manifesto. Neither egalitarianism nor hierarchy are statically real. Egalitarianism is wrong on its face, while hierarchy merely becomes anti-real when it does not admit of evolution.

 

[redbaron]

A different possibility of a male feeling awkward and uncomfortable dancing with another male, is that there are social influences, a possibility of criticism and being shamed from others. The internal conflict is taking criticism from other people, while perhaps not minding male-male dancing personally.

Sure except that has nothing to do with this situation. The girl was in a dance class and dancing with numerous people. Any male wearing a dress in the dance class will dance with everyone too.

If anyone's going to take criticism, it's the one breaking the social mould in the first place not the 149 other people.

In the real world it's not relevant because no one's forcing you to dance with men if you don't want to. You can just say no.

The fear is really about standing out differently from the standards of other people.

Whatever the reason is, the point still stands that it's only a problem if you actually want to discriminate in the first place. It's only a problem for people who want to choose their dance partner based on, "reason here" in a dance class. Whether it's because you're socially uneasy or actually sexist, it's still only a problem if you want to discriminate based on that.

In the context of this dance class it's not even relevant, since everybody is dancing with the girl. No one is being singled out as different for it.

Again in the real world you can just say no.

A girl wearing a suit in a dance class is not a problem.

 

[Minuend]

My reasoning was that it was her forcing her sexuality onto the other young girls. Did they want to dance with her? Any way you look at it she was a minority, how far should the majority adapt and accept her predilections?

Girl dances with girl
Boy dances with girl

The first one is forcing her sexuality, the latter is not. For some reason.

There was certainly not much sexual about my forced high school dancing with sweaty palms and steeping on toes. And if we were uneven in numbers, the opposite gender had to be erm be the opposite gender. I didn't really think about it at all. But then again, I've never had any sense of gender identity and the fact that people care about gendered split clothing created entirely from culture baffles me. People could wear pineapples as gloves and whatever.

I think there would be more interesting experiences to learn for the kids if they were encouraged to change roles. To get a feel of how it is to lead and be lead. More experiences like that could form more interesting mentalities for them. There should be exploration and search. Not doing through research to be sure you are indeed the good stereotype of a gender you should be. Are you a man. Likes beer- check. Looks at boobs a lot- check.

Well, most things are already said, I guess. This bicycle is two tired and will go to sleep.

 

[OrLevitate]

Yah people need to realize human on human is what it is. man on man jiujitsu is really pretty gay. i did a bunch of it and like 9.9/10 they had some sort of defense to me as a new comer like 'oh by the way i know this looks gay but its totally cool'.

"Not looking for an answer but an interesting discussion. I know we have some gay, bi or cross dressing/trans gender folks here.

So my son is..."
^was the thing i saw by mousing over the thread kekekekek

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Looking back at my post I write "you" way too much, sorry about that, I'm just frustrated by that mentality because it doesn't enable progress and when I write "you" I mean it in general plural sense.

The problem with writing you, as it seems to me, is that you mentally exclude yourself from progress and you already become the just one, from that slight detail it cascades.

@Blarraun: cba to defend the picture, don't feel like you got the point of it

If this wasn't guilt tripping then what was it?

I think that only dancing with people you're attracted to could be considered kinda discriminatory. Lot's of people dance with people they aren't attracted to, balls kinda require that they do. As I said earlier I don't think anyone should be forced to dance with anyone, but if you go to a dance class where you're gonna be dancing with a bunch of people for sure but refuse to dance with someone because of their sex I'd say you're in the wrong.

I didn't mean to imply that sexual attraction is the only reason people dance, two people dancing could have many motivations and outcomes.
We don't have that rejection, clearly they are all dancing and it only raised a discussion about whether it's normal or acceptable, while the kids seem to get along fine.

This is what I want to focus on, that we suddenly shifted from judging the young boy, who doesn't have that problem and has been raised and accustomed to the new rules and freedoms that people enjoy and express, to the representatives of the older generations, who didn't experience as much and aren't open to the idea and it somehow is considered wrong.

I say we should judge these two generations by two different cultural standards and two different models, one will pass and the other emerges to be and I don't support the multiple instances of attacking the old people on this forum that stem solely from the generational differences, without any hope for understanding and tolerance of different norms.

Yeah you could see the dance as part of a courting ritual and yes there's going to be situations where people are made uncomfortable, but the pains we have to go through for a better world are nothing compared to the pains that people endure in the current one.

Sure, the pains one has to go through for the revolution, burning flags, marking down houses of ideological enemies and whatnot.

 

[crippli]

Not to mention, how far it's gotten from the participant to his parent in this discussion.

It makes more sense to discuss the parents if one is to go with the status quo. The parents are the ones orchestrating the activity. And it's been put down in words(see quote below) why all those who lead may force their sexuality upon the ones being led. So the premise is false. It is not about the participant. Only this one participant made it possible for Architect to see that dancing may include forcing ones sexuality upon the other. And that I think can be a valid subject to discuss.

Girl dances with girl
Boy dances with girl

The first one is forcing her sexuality, the latter is not. For some reason.

That is a valid point. This render Architects argument false.

I think there would be more interesting experiences to learn for the kids if they were encouraged to change roles. To get a feel of how it is to lead and be lead.

Not only that. That would also solve the issue of having a sexuality forced upon oneself. As one can choose if one want to "be forced, or to force".

Free pick of the outfit before dance lessons again then. It is the only solution that add up in logical terms and addresses all concerns.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

It makes more sense to discuss the parents if one is to go with the status quo. The parents are the ones orchestrating the activity. And it's been put down in words(see quote below) why all those who lead may force their sexuality upon the ones being led. So the premise is false. It is not about the participant. Only this one participant made it possible for Architect to see that dancing may include forcing ones sexuality upon the other. And that I think can be a valid subject to discuss.

A valid point, about forcing sexuality.

I don't intend to defend that line of reasoning and my initial post was focused predominantly on something else.

 

[dark+matters]

Not looking for an answer but an interesting discussion. I know we have some gay, bi or cross dressing/trans gender folks here.

So my son is growing up and we signed him up for dance lessons. One of those things out of the 50's ... about 150 young people all dressed up taking dance lessons. As much introducing them to the opposite sex as to learning how to dance. The girls all wear dresses and white gloves with the boys in suits. They get a random partner, learn a few steps, then move on to the next partner. The hormones must be running pretty hot, just sitting on the edge us older parents can feel it.

At any rate the other time we saw a young adult, a girl maybe 14 or 15, who was dressed in a suit. Looked like a little stout banker and had her hair in a pony tail. Obviously she's gay, bi or otherwise a trans gender. We were impressed that she seemed so comfortable with it at that age. She played the male role and went around dancing with female partners.

Now this is formal dance - the male has one part and the female another. The male leads, has his hand on her upper side, and she rests her hand on his upper arm. How the dance moves go depends too, he spins her, and the way they end up is set also. The instructor explained it that it's the male's job to make the female feel comfortable. All very gallant.

At any rate, my wife thought it was pretty awesome this young woman could take the other side. I thought it was great she was so comfortable and aware of the situation, however I didn't think it was appropriate to do so in that class. My reasoning was that it was her forcing her sexuality onto the other young girls. Did they want to dance with her? Any way you look at it she was a minority, how far should the majority adapt and accept her predilections?

We thought that the least she should do is ask first, but even then there isn't much time to make a decision. The partners would just have a few moments to make a snap decision, I'd like some time to sort out my thoughts on the issue.

Of course it has a larger context. I think a lot about "Type Rights" - for example with INTP's. My family is all Sensor, how much should I demand they adapt to my predilections? In point of fact I demand acceptance, would appreciate understanding, but don't ask for them to embrace my preferences. I don't ask them to avoid small talk, go to Shakespeare plays and the like.

Is this young woman asking others to (literally) embrace her sexuality?

Discussion welcome ...

I've been thinking a very great deal about type rights too, these days. I'm in a society which constantly forces me to enter into an unnatural sleep cycle (I'm a hard-core night owl, and a lot of other INTPs are too, from what I understand, but this is definitely an overall 9-5 kind of world). It's very challenging to find times and places to introvert while also earning enough resources to survive. I've always found it very hard to strictly adhere to a time schedule. And very few jobs are able to identify, use, and pay me for the things I actually do well.

I usually like to read every single reply before typing my own response, but I didn't have time this morning before I must do my homework, etc., so I apologize if my response is repeating others' ideas.

I think society is obliged to make reasonable accommodations for any deeply ingrained differences between people that affect the quality of their lives and their ability to find a job, find relationships, etc., especially once those differences are identified and confirmed. I'm not sure that MBTI type will ever fit into this, but it could be a really good thing for us all if empirical data about it started compounding, and there began to be a greater understanding for how everyone can get plugged into society in the most useful and satisfying manner. Some mental disabilities are starting to pick up awareness and are starting to fight back against all the negative stereotypes surrounding them (depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, etc.) and I'm curious to see how identifying personality or any other kinds of internal differences between people (in a positive manner) will contribute to future world peace.

I think that it's very important to society's growth to accommodate differences like this young lady's, because we are now and will always be in the process of evolving, and we don't know what unique gifts a certain "kind" of person could offer us one day. I think it's similar to why we need to preserve biodiversity. One never knows when a species will step in with a key bit of information to save the day.

I'm a heterosexual female and I took a dance class in which a lesbian dressed in a suit and danced the male roles. The situation sounds very similar to the given example. I did dance with her, I did feel as though I was obligated to dance with her, and that we were all obliged to dance with her, without forcing any personal, emotional baggage about homosexuality onto her (in reality, I have absolutely zero problems with a person having homosexual feelings). As I think someone else stated, a boy dancing me would have been equally sexually... provocative- maybe even more so since I actually do have heterosexual feelings from time to time.

I once took it upon myself to talk to an obviously very "weird" person who was struggling to fit into some of the other classes I was taking. The teacher was actively insulting him during studio time, and yes, this person was clearly not someone who "got" certain aspects of what we were trying to do, but it wasn't until about two years later that I really understood exactly what he was good at, and just how excellent he was, and how much that department would have benefited by having some understanding of how he was different from us.

What worries me the most about ignoring someone who is very different who has very different needs, is the pain and suffering it inflicts on that person, which then spills over onto people who have nothing directly connected to the situation. (Look at the high rates of LGBT suicides, the suffering Oscar Wilde endured and inflicted because he was forced to hide his homosexuality. Look at all the school shootings and murder/suicides happening these days. Autism and schizophrenia are supposed to be caused by extra growth in the brain- not less. What if we as a species are struggling to be able to ingest more information- especially now that we're in the digital age?)

I think we hit a wall when it comes to sociopathy, pedophilia and other criminal activities, but even so, if there was a way to allow these people to channel abnormal impulses like that elsewhere where it wouldn't interfere with our goals/beliefs, etc., wouldn't we all be so much happier? I'm sure there are many things we can learn from every different type of brain. Look at all the good that "psychopath" Sam Vaknin is performing. Society as a whole definitely benefits from all kinds of diversity. It would be far less rich, fulfilling and productive without it.

 

[dark+matters]

Actually, here's a clearer example of three possible (and likely) ways I think the situation with the young lady might have gone down:

1) The majority could have unanimously agreed that what she was trying to do was wrong. She would feel inherently bad, ashamed, angry, sad, confused, and would be more prone to thinking about either harming herself or harming someone else. This emotional state could easily lead to a suicide, drug-addiction, or school-shooter situation.

2) Some could have said, "Yes, I will dance with you," others could have said "No, I will not, for __(x)___ reason(s)." Paranoia, suspicion, anger, confusion, and sadness would ensue for her because of those few who turned her down, and it would sow the seeds for hatred of anyone in the future who might remind her of those people who said, "No, I will not-" because they had unresolved personal issues with sexuality. This could easily distract her from a more productive use of her mental space, and could still lead to anxiety, depression, lack of focus, etc.

3) Everyone could just accept it, accept her homosexuality, treat her as no different, and she won't develop these feelings of hatred, shame, prejudice, etc., and can go on to use her brain space to become a choreographer, an engineer, etc. instead of indulging in fear, confusion and anger.

This is how I see it.

 

[The Grey Man]

Meh. The situation described in the OP could conceivably make people uncomfortable, but it's by no means a major problem.

What really bothers me is some posters' narrow, knee jerk rejections of Architect's differing viewpoint.

 

[crippli]

Nicely written dark+matters. I read the posts though, as a whole they form a rather interesting picture. It's like a little reality in it self.

(Look at the high rates of LGBT suicides, the suffering Oscar Wilde endured and inflicted because he was forced to hide his homosexuality. Look at all the school shootings and murder/suicides happening these days. Autism and schizophrenia are supposed to be caused by extra growth in the brain- not less. What if we as a species are struggling to be able to ingest more information- especially now that we're in the digital age?)

The influence of media have not been covered in the debate. And is in my opinion substantial. I'm not sure if you are indicating that issues are caused by information overload? Or that media could be better at cowering a wider spectrum? I feel that large movie productions are very conservative. There are areas they dare not venture into. Something as simplistic as that the president of the united states have a boyfriend, and is loved by the people for this. Pictured stealtily, in a way that everyone was used to it. The boyfriend was the support and the reason the president was able to get in a good days work each day. I've seen all sorts of representations of the president, some highly illigal and bad. But never this variant. I think that is a shame. If someone gives me founding I'll direct one. High level thriller where the president saves the world at the end of the day. A romantic kiss by the two lovebirds in the sunset will be the closing chapter

 

[Cherry Cola]

Meh. The situation described in the OP could conceivably make people uncomfortable, but it's by no means a major problem.

What really bothers me is some posters' narrow, knee jerk rejections of Architect's differing viewpoint.

Except it's not a knee-jerk, it's quite thought through.

 

[The Grey Man]

Except it's not a knee-jerk, it's quite thought through.

Hmm, I suppose I can only guess at the thought process behind a particular post, however you can do better. I take it, then, that you're speaking for yourself.

If anyone gets offended that person is touchy, it's not like they have to sleep with that girl just dance in a public setting. You can't have the right to be offended over everything.

Trivializing people who don't agree with you...

This issue is so easy to get just get the fuck over on an individual level so I don't see any reason to defend the culture that keeps it one, you don't get to be offended because you had to dance with someone of the same gender, simple as that.

...while expressing a desire to see them silenced from expressing a different opinion.

There is no law forcing people to embrace technology either, but the people that don't do it are old or retarded, generally speaking, and they suffer negative consequences for it. I don't see the problem with conservative bigots suffering negative consequences for their conservatism either, if they become alienated and have their silly traditions ruined in favor of egalitarianism then that's completely fine with me. Oh no you are uncomfortable dancing with someone of your own sex? Grow up!

I thought we were supposed to be the bastion against the majority in that picture. I guess it has more to do with the side that agrees with you...

Thing is people can think whatever they want. It's not their thoughts that are the problem. They just need to behave. Then they'll learn to think later in order to avoid cognitive dissonance.

...however mindlessly compliant they are. Y'know, I thought the horse of conviction was meant to come before the dogmatic cart.

I was quick to dismiss your posts as "knee jerk" reactions. I know see that they were thought through, however suppressive and intellectually domineering their manner. As for the argument itself, I've already spoken to my opinion on the matter.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Trivializing people who don't agree with you...

Yes what an awful breach of protocol... ooops I did it again. Again, no one should be forced to dance with anyone, but if you attend dance classes then you should dance with everyone regardless of their sexuality and gender. Though, if you really feel like your whole world would come tumbling down if you were to dance with another man don't do it. But if that's the case you should be asking yourself why you're so wound up over something so trivial (ooops 3rd time). If it's not such a big deal to you then you should just do it, out of kindness if nothing else.

There's no law that I'm suggesting we enforce here. I'm just propogating what I see as right.

...while expressing a desire to see them silenced from expressing a different opinion.

Uh yeah I'd rather it wasn't considered socially acceptable to discriminate against people based on their sexuality, or race for that matter. And quite a few other things. In a Utopian society there would be anarchy, socially and legally. But that's not going to work in the foreseeable future.

I thought we were supposed to be the bastion against the majority in that picture. I guess it has more to do with the side that agrees with you...

What? Who cares about the majority's stance? I care about which stance is the right one.

My position is one that aims at lessening the suffering of queer people while most others take one that simply ignores it. Realize that culture is always going to be more or less unfair, there are always going to be people that are made uncomfortable by it. Queer people happen to be a very large group that suffers cultural oppression more than most other groups though and for no reason. They aren't causing anything bad.

But they are getting shit thrown at them constantly from conservatives anyway, if stopping this shit throwing means that conservatives are gonna have to make some uncomfortable adjustments then that's not a problem for me, because they can adjust. Culture isn't static. But the qualities which define the queer are, they are going to be perpetually suffering unless things change.

Do the math. The only reason this is a matter of opinion here is because people are thinkers.

...however mindlessly compliant they are. Y'know, I thought the horse of conviction was meant to come before the dogmatic cart.

As if though mindless compliance isn't what defines most people already.

 

[The Grey Man]

Yes what an awful breach of protocol... ooops I did it again. Again, no one should be forced to dance with anyone, but if you attend dance classes then you should dance with everyone regardless of their sexuality and gender. Though, if you really feel like your whole world would come tumbling down if you were to dance with another man don't do it. But if that's the case you should be asking yourself why you're so wound up over something so trivial (ooops 3rd time). If it's not such a big deal to you then you should just do it, out of kindness if nothing else.

You've already demonstrated your contempt for dissenters. Not sure how I feel about your repeating your argument to me, despite my making no reference to it in my post.

There's no law that I'm suggesting we enforce here. I'm just propogating what I see as right.

You're still speaking in terms of what people should be "allowed" to do.

Uh yeah I'd rather it wasn't considered socially acceptable to discriminate against people based on their sexuality, or race for that matter. And quite a few other things. In a Utopian society there would be anarchy, socially and legally. But that's not going to work in the foreseeable future.

So let me guess, social interaction needs to be regulated. Are you sure there's no legal aspect to your argument?

What? Who cares about the majority's stance? I care about which stance is the right one.

My position is one that aims at lessening the suffering of queer people while most others take one that simply ignores it. Realize that culture is always going to be more or less unfair, there are always going to be people that are made uncomfortable by it. Queer people happen to be a very large group that suffers cultural oppression more than most other groups though and for no reason. They aren't causing anything bad.

But they are getting shit thrown at them constantly from conservatives anyway, if stopping this shit throwing means that conservatives are gonna have to make some uncomfortable adjustments then that's not a problem for me, because they can adjust. Culture isn't static. But the qualities which define the queer are, they are going to be perpetually suffering unless things change.

Do the math. The only reason this is a matter of opinion here is because people are thinkers.

More unilateralist ideology and references to conservatism. Ok I'll bite: what "change" are you suggesting?

As if though mindless compliance isn't what defines most people already.

-_-

If that were true, I'd still consider it unethical to exploit the general idiocy in order to garner political clout. No matter what, politics need to be conducted with integrity and clarity, in service to the populace, and not self-interest. But that's just me, and off-topic.

 

[Cherry Cola]

You've already demonstrated your contempt for dissenters. Not sure how I feel about your repeating your argument to me, despite my making no reference to it in my post.

And you've already demonstrated that when you sense your lofty ideals being threatened you're perfectly fine with prioritizing them over stopping the perpetuated suffering of a large group of people. Realize that your position is no less dogmatic than mine. It's just less consistent and thought through. You're the one who wants to stand by and watch while the social deviants that are the queer suffer simply for being different.

You're still speaking in terms of what people should be "allowed" to do.

Yeah so? What is your problem (likely an instinctual dislike of extroverted judging)? I've stated clearly that I'm not suggesting we create laws and that I don't want anyone to be forced to dance with anyone. You're the one bringing politics and all that into the picture.

So let me guess, social interaction needs to be regulated. Are you sure there's no legal aspect to your argument?

Social interaction is regulated by protocol. We can't not have a protocol. But we can try to improve the protocol, that's what I'm suggesting we do. Are you not aware that norms and culture universally regulate social interaction between humans? Here you make the mistake of defending something that does not exists, just as you do later on when you state your political ideas. Yeah we can discuss how things should work in the best of worlds. But that's not particularly relevant here because unless you change the human genome what I've said is how it works.

More unilateralist ideology and references to conservatism. Ok I'll bite: what "change" are you suggesting?

How nice of you to not answer any of my arguments, instead resorting to branding them unilateral and whatnot in order to peg me as some sort of facist/dogmatic when as I said earlier I'm not even talking politics. That's something you're doing quite a lot btw.

In any case, I advocate the change I've already suggested. Ie that people who don't have anything against queer people and are aware of how they suffer stop supporting practices that discriminate against them and start speaking up. That since they are aware of the fact that whatever discomfort they may experience engaging with queer people is nothing compared to how queer people suffer (and furthermore, that since they know this discomfort can be overcome quite easily) they act accordingly.

Dancing with someone of the same sex during dancing classes is one example of this. Even if it makes you a little uncomfortable you should do it for reasons already several times mentioned (but repeatedly ignored).

-_-

If that were true, I'd still consider it unethical to exploit the general idiocy in order to garner political clout. No matter what, politics need to be conducted with integrity and clarity, in service to the populace, and not self-interest. But that's just me, and off-topic.

Why are you suggesting I'm being self serving? Because I advocate my position with conviction and it suggest a common course of action? That's something IxNJs tend to do. The Knee Jerk here is your aversion to extroverted judging.

How is what I'm suggesting not in service to the populace? Or is a more tolerant society where queer people don't suffer perpetual discrimination not something the populace desires? No the populace wants that, it just doesn't want to actually do anything to achieve it.

That you think politics needs to be conducted with integrity and clarity is completely irrelevant. You're welcome to come up with a political system that enables such conduct but until then I must ask why you are bringing it up?

You just don't like my tone, you don't give a fuck about the actual arguments I'm putting forwards. Kindly say more about the subject matter and less about me. Kindly use less adjectives and more reason. Kindly stop fashioning my arguments in politics and instead meet them on the ethical level they function.

 

[Cherry Cola]

What about dancing with a woman who you don't find attractive? Still confronting?

Nope because male sexuality=its beneficial for the spreading of your genes to sleep with anyone who can bear children, hence they, generally speaking, are not creeped out nearly as easily by females as females are by men. Meanwhile women have to dance with men even if they find them repulsive and that's okay.

 

[Absurdity]

Yeah I'm using shaming tactics so? The rest of what you said isn't true unless you are unable to see the wider implications of this topic, limiting it to the dance class mentioned in the OP.

In any case, I made a case. You were like Fi sentiment>done. That's insanity.

Oh and you're not a fatalist? Well I'm not saying we should aim for Utopia either. But apparently I'm imagining a Utopia because I think we could live in a world where a man dancing with another man isn't a big deal. There's a large group of people in the west who aren't homophobic, but will still support practices that are and are unwilling to change arbitrary traditions because it makes them uncomfortable. That's apparent in this thread too.

It's really weird how in this topic, there is no need to make any sense, here it is okay to simply go with your instincts. Classic NT.

You have a point with respect to my not having thought my position on this through enough. I see that now and I'm willing to acknowledge it.

I guess the "sentiment" that motivates my response to this subject and other similar issues of minority acceptance and what not is the totalistic aspect that is often implicit in it. There doesn't seem to be any room to agree to disagree, and that makes it difficult for me to agree with or support these issues, despite the fact that they clearly have the best intentions and for the most part are championed by good people.

Edit: And by agree to disagree I don't mean in principle but spatially, in practice. It doesn't seem to be enough to say, "Okay you can have your completely open society that accepts all forms of gender identity and sexuality over there and we'll have our traditional society over here, best of luck to us both and anyone can go to whichever they choose."

 

[Cherry Cola]

Though I should l2fucking communicate properly, obviously the way I've going about it here is not the right way. Too fired up.

 

[crippli]

I'm puzzled. This is always the same pattern. If we take another situation that is more easy to relate to. A room with similarly intelligent people. And one notably smarter person joins in. There is the situation again. For some it's great, for some uncomfortable etc. Now, what is the best strategy and tactic for the smarter person to do?

The answer to that is the same as the answer to this, in general terms.

 

[The Grey Man]

Whoa ok. Clearly making comments about the way people comment leads to bad things...

Sorry, Cola, looks like I was the knee jerk after all. I assumed your position on LGBT had some legally compulsive component, and that you were talking around it.

And I wasn't trying to suggest that you were self-serving. That was just an aside about anti-misanthropy (counter-misanthropy?).

 

[StevenM]

There doesn't seem to be any room to agree to disagree, and that makes it difficult for me to agree with or support these issues, despite the fact that they clearly have the best intentions and for the most part are championed by good people.

That is a very good point.

Not pointing this at you Absurdity.

In an aspect of doing the 'right' and moral thing, I think it is important to leave some people space to disagree, and respect that.

In pushing values on people, especially certain people, there may be a strong reaction to resist. The fighting and 'spitefulness' used to win people over to gay acceptance, can tempt people to despise or fear gays even more.

With these people, it's best to show you come in peace.

But....

I can see why queers just can't sit passively in the corner and not make a sound. For sure, there is real oppression, and something should be done about it. I can see how changing people's beliefs is the best way to accomplish this, and attempt to snuff out any disillusioned hatred, or misconceptions about gender (like what can be blatantly found in the original post of this thread, now that I read it again).

One could say an "opinion" is contagious, and gays are at war by fixing and replacing the majority public opinion. We need supporters, and people to stop spreading bad and misinformed ideas that ultimately create more oppression. Because as it stands, in totality, the amount of supporters is still very few.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Too true

 

[Lot]

hugs all around

I'm not asking for permission
I'm forcing my Fe on everyone in the thread
My pink frilly dress of Fe
Cross dressing my Fe in your dance hall of intpforum

Take that cultural norms

#SocialJustisWarriorForLife

 

[scorpiomover]

Not looking for an answer but an interesting discussion. I know we have some gay, bi or cross dressing/trans gender folks here.

So my son is growing up and we signed him up for dance lessons. One of those things out of the 50's ... about 150 young people all dressed up taking dance lessons. As much introducing them to the opposite sex as to learning how to dance. The girls all wear dresses and white gloves with the boys in suits. They get a random partner, learn a few steps, then move on to the next partner. The hormones must be running pretty hot, just sitting on the edge us older parents can feel it.

At any rate the other time we saw a young adult, a girl maybe 14 or 15, who was dressed in a suit. Looked like a little stout banker and had her hair in a pony tail. Obviously she's gay, bi or otherwise a trans gender. We were impressed that she seemed so comfortable with it at that age. She played the male role and went around dancing with female partners.

Now this is formal dance - the male has one part and the female another. The male leads, has his hand on her upper side, and she rests her hand on his upper arm. How the dance moves go depends too, he spins her, and the way they end up is set also. The instructor explained it that it's the male's job to make the female feel comfortable. All very gallant.

At any rate, my wife thought it was pretty awesome this young woman could take the other side. I thought it was great she was so comfortable and aware of the situation, however I didn't think it was appropriate to do so in that class. My reasoning was that it was her forcing her sexuality onto the other young girls. Did they want to dance with her? Any way you look at it she was a minority, how far should the majority adapt and accept her predilections?

We thought that the least she should do is ask first, but even then there isn't much time to make a decision. The partners would just have a few moments to make a snap decision, I'd like some time to sort out my thoughts on the issue.

Of course it has a larger context. I think a lot about "Type Rights" - for example with INTP's. My family is all Sensor, how much should I demand they adapt to my predilections? In point of fact I demand acceptance, would appreciate understanding, but don't ask for them to embrace my preferences. I don't ask them to avoid small talk, go to Shakespeare plays and the like.

Is this young woman asking others to (literally) embrace her sexuality?

There's a few nudist camps where I work. They believe that it's their natural sexuality to go around naked, and society has been oppressing them for thousands of years. Personally, I agree. If people should be allowed to live their lives freely, then they MUST be allowed to go around starkers. If you have a boner because of a hot naked woman, or you don't like that your wife is more interested in a hot, naked, muscular, fit younger man, then that's your problem.

If a naked woman came into a dance hall I was in and started dancing, I'd probably look. Buf it the administrators didn't bat an eyelid, I'd assume that it was normal. I'd probably not ask her to dance, in case I got a boner. But that's about it. I'd think that it was extremely brave of her to make a stand for what is right. If your kids were in the room, I'd probably say that you should make them shake her hand, so that they learn to understand that there's nothing wrong with such people.

But, most people would probably tell me that it's child abuse to let a 5-year-old boy dance with a 15-year-old naked girl. Stupid people.

If I was running the hall, I'd probably initally say "no", because it would cause too many clashes. But if the girl's parents were persistent, I'd agree, but on 2 conditions:

1) That ALL attendees MUST give written consent that they and their parents understand that a girl will be present wearing men's uniform and acting as a man.

2) That ALL attendees MUST play the other gender's role for at least ONE dance a session. She may want to be a boy. But she's going to have to learn what it means to be a boy. You toe the line, no matter what.

I'd still probably say that the girl's parents are irrational for not letting her walk around naked, though.

 

[Jennywocky]

hugs all around

I'm not asking for permission
I'm forcing my Fe on everyone in the thread
My pink frilly dress of Fe
Cross dressing my Fe in your dance hall of intpforum

Take that cultural norms

#SocialJustisWarriorForLife

You know, I don't give a shit about the dress.
... but pink? *shudder*

 

[~~~]

You're more than welcome to let me dance with this one...
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014...ge_galleryImage_NEW_YORK_NY_NOVEMBER_05_M.JPG