Carlos Santana, Alice Cooper, Róisín Murphy, Dave Chappelle, J.K. Rowling, Harry Jowsey, Bette Midler, Macy Gray, Kevin Hart, John Cleese
I find this kind of article discouraging for two different reasons. First, the initial statement that it makes, what’s on the surface. You see all these people making all these horrible comments and it’s sad.
The other thing that’s just as discouraging to me is the reaction. From what I understand the best way to approach this kind of thing is through education and compassion, ultimately leading to conversion.
You’ll never convince anyone by screaming at them and you’ll just bring yourself “to their level”
What I would like to see instead It’s for everyone to be a little bit more like Daryl Davis. Now I understand that not everyone has the patience of Daryl Davis, but I think this man’s example is the ultimate model to follow.
For those who don’t already know, Daryl Davis is an African American blues musician but spent his free time converting a couple hundred Klan members from being racist. I understand that’s a really clumsy way to say it but I really don’t have a better term for that because people don’t typically believe that people can be converted from racism. This dude did it.
What I find really discouraging is that the anger, the vitriol, the pain at hearing these things come out of people’s faces is fully human, a natural response, a normal response. What I fear is that if we don’t all become like Daryl will none of us survive. What I fear is that it’s not fair to expect many people to become like Daryl at all.
There’s just too much money to be made peddling rage.
Oh god, not this bullshit again
Transphobes can eat my ass
Ok well while they do that, they’re still voting and spreading their ideas to like minded individuals. I’m not saying we normalize their behavior. Fuck that backwards shit. But your dismissive attitude only serves to alleviate your own burden of interacting with them and entrenching them further in their hatred of those with other options.
Feel free to disagree, because I definitely understand the mental difficulty of dealing with people that just want to hate. So I’d love an alternative. But treating people as disposable ain’t it, I’m afraid.
Thank you for responding with the eloquence that I simply do not have the mental energy to summon today. You’ve saved me some spoons. ❤️
I’m open to different viewpoints, but I won’t engage in a conversation that’s filled with hostility.
What I would like to see instead It’s for everyone to be a little bit more like Daryl Davis. Now I understand that not everyone has the patience of Daryl Davis, but I think this man’s example is the ultimate model to follow.
damn that was an interesting read.
The guy is just downright fascinating. I don’t know how he managed to get himself to the place where he could just go sit down in a bar with some klansmen and just be like “hey dude you want to have a drink?” but in my mind, this is what the transphobic hateful Christians do not understand about being christ-like. It’s this guy. Daryl. This guy is the epitome of the phrase “forgive them for they know not what they do”.
And if you don’t like Christianity that’s fine don’t call him Christlike, call him the ultimate humanist. He’s seeing the human, he seeing the person, he has the ability to differentiate the opinion from the human being that’s sitting in front of him spewing out the vitriol.
That, my friend, is some next level shit right there.
This guy is the epitome of the phrase “forgive them for they know not what they do”
Yeah! And he seems to do it with such simplicity. Also its cool he has a podcast, I might listen to that.
Makes me wonder- could the same be done with alt right types?
I think it can be but the power in what he does is that he is exactly what they’re supposed to be hating, right? He is the person that they say that they hate!
I feel like I almost wouldn’t be able to do what he’s doing in this particular case because I’m not trans, I’m not gay, there’s no reason for them to see me as the Boogeyman that they’re told to hate.
To the extent that I represent what they fear, what they despise, yes, I am able to do the kind of thing with right-wingers that he is able to do with klansman.
Case and point, my neighbors are racist. They voted for Trump. They think that getting vaccinated is a bunch of bullshit. Some of those things will never be able to fully combat because there’s too much working against you right? There’s this whole dialog, this whole propaganda machine that you would be fighting against. What I do know is that they see me as a person, they see me even as a friend because we’re on good terms. I’m not some boogie man, I’m not some lib that needs to be owned, I’m a neighbor, I’m a human fucking being.
Certainly it will never be a cure-all for ignorance but actually having relationships with other human beings really does show us that we’ve got more in common than different and that there is something else for us to unite against that is working against us.
We need to all be in this together and that can never be the case if we are all fighting each other.
I fail to see how befriending your racist neighbors does anything at all. You said yourself, you’re not from any of the marginalized groups they hate. You just…have a racist friend now. And if you have a racist friend…
Maybe if I asked you a question, you might understand my point better.
If I choose anger, outrage, fury… If I alienate my neighbor, my literal neighbor, what does that achieve me? What do I get?
If I proved to them that I am everything that they have been told to hate about liberals instead of talking to them about what we both believe the real problem is, and having met them, talk to them, and befriended them, I see now that we both agree about at least done, what would I have achieved? Can you answer me that?
How would I have bettered myself? How would I have better than? Would the world be a better place? If you can answer me that, then I think I might understand a bit more about where you’re coming from.
Edit: so I woke up, had a shower, and thought about this a little bit. I have introspection and reflection on what I’m thinking and what I am doing. If I find flaws that only means that I am more able to find better ways to do what I want to do. So, do you feel like everything that you think is correct? Do you look for flaws in your own thinking?
Finally, they are my neighbors in the end so there’s that, but also how can I possibly speak up for those who are marginalized and who are minorities if I are not in the conversation at all? If no one is listening, doesn’t matter what you’re saying? If I’m not changing any minds, am I accomplishing anything or am I just in another fucking echo chamber talking to like-minded people and accomplishing nothing?
In the end, I just question what are my goals? What kind of world do I want to live in? How is what I’m doing achieving those goals?
I want peace and unity. I want kindness.
There is a difference between keeping peaceful relations with your neighbor and befriending them though. You said yourself they are not likely to change their mind. If that is true your friendship does nothing to help marginalized folks. In fact it hurts them since your friendship is a tacit endorsement of their behavior. I’m not saying yell and scream and throw stuff at them when you see them, but there is a difference between cordial neighbor and friends. If you really want unity and kindness, you can’t tolerate hate.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/toleration/
Or if you want a shorter read
Yeah, I think the reason I stayed in shitty places like 4chan and other alt right places was because I thought I was getting through to people.
And I am someone they hate. I’m a bisexual woman who actually dated women and I’m filipino. So bam, two things they not only hate but like to exploit and use.
But I found they often will go along with stuff like this just so they can add fuel to their fire so to speak. They want to have stories where someone tried to explain something to them, or they want to have that argument about how “black men have a violent gene” like they would just enjoy discussing that instead of actually changing their mind. They love to be contrarian about anything.
And of course that’s the crowd that overlaps with white supremacy. So it seems like you can through to some of them who probably aren’t in that deep but others- you’re right, there’s too much working against you to fight it. Plus the people you’re fighting, are enjoying the fight.
Like how do you get through to someone who gets off on that?
Well, I think that with those that are just playing a game trying to see how much they can agitate you, you don’t engage in that part. That reminds me of a conversation I had as a 7cups of tea listener before I realized 7cups is kinda evil. They were trying to “shock” me by saying outrageous and disgusting things about incest. They were unable to handle it when I decided to throw radical acceptance at them and was like , “yeah, that must make your life hard. I’m sorry to hear that, do you have a therapist that you can talk to about that…” and so on.
Maybe they were being sincere, maybe, but when I just treated them with kindness, they realized it wasn’t fun and they left the conversation. They realized, I think, that they were just being inappropriate.
There is no way to get through to everyone, all you can do is try.
This comment restored a little of my faith in humanity today. Thanks. I know a lot of people understand this. But the loudest people on the internet don’t and that can be discouraging.
Social change is created by social friction. It always has been and always will be.
And you’re right, we won’t change the bigots and pull them out of bigotry. But they’re not the point. The goal is to challenge the social norms that they are creating, because it’s those norms that create new bigots.
The existence of those norms makes bigotry possible, but I really don’t think that the norms are the biggest driver here. I believe that we are being intentionally pitted against each other. I think that is the real cause .
Again, I will point out that social friction is how social change is brought about. Always. Every single time.
What you’re asking for is to sustain the status quo, and that status quo wants us dead.
Are there leagues of liberals uniting with conservatives and solving our common issues?
Would that be the status quo?
More than one way to skin a cat my friend.
Divided, we fall.
Are there leagues of liberals uniting with conservatives and solving our common issues?
No, because they want us dead.
Would that be the status quo?
No, that would be them wanting us dead
Divided, we fall.
They want us dead. It doesn’t get much more divided than that
So… what you’re saying is… They want us dead?
Just fn with ya. I get where you’re coming from. It makes sense.
You could easily change the headline to “Out of touch old people you forgot about and still think it’s 1975”
I have a little bit of sympathy for people who are from another era, and are stubborn but not intentionally hateful or dismissive. The Bette Midler quote is the only example from this article. Before, she’d never come across as someone who judges people or wants to treat them like second class citizens.
She should have kept her mouth shut, at least. Although making an uninformed remark is quicker and easier than educating yourself, I wish she had taken the time.
Santana, however, can kiss my ass.
I have a little bit of sympathy for people who are from another era
I don’t. Trans people are a new thing for me too, they didn’t “exist” in my formative years. I grew up in Oklahoma surrounded by conservative Bible-belt redneck N-word-spouting family, at a public school where “gay” and “hermaphrodite” were used as gym insults. I’m a straight-passing white cis male with pretty blue eyes, the least oppressed motherfucker out here and a perfect candidate for growing up to be a shitty supremacist.
Yet I’m the farthest thing from one, because all it actually takes is asking myself “Why should I have a problem with this? Does it affect anyone other than the person being made happier?” When the answer comes up as “no,” it’s A-OK in my book. And don’t get me started on the pricks who think “but I’m Christian!!!” is an excuse for anything, God is supposed to judge us, not my asshole neighbor Karen who grew up on leaded gas and cigarettes.
Cool. Maintaining flexibility is hard. I wish more people were better at it.
Part of my “cut them a bit of slack” attitude comes from personal experience. I’ve been watching an otherwise good person shift gradually further right. Since retirement, they watch TV almost constantly, which unfortunately includes Fox News (I was going to say “too much Fox News”, but any amount of that crap is too much).
Midler came up playing the NYC bathhouses which were essentially fuck clubs for gay men before AIDS shuttered them all. I have a difficult time seeing her being anti-LGBT given how gay her fan base traditionally was.
She’s not anti-gay, she’s anti-trans.
Her comment sounds like she isn’t anti trans but more has a problem with terms like birthing person instead of cis-woman or woman depending on context.
It’s not anti-trans to suggest we use the term women rather than birthing person when discussing pregnancy fir example.
It’s not strictly anti-trans, but it does erase entire swaths of people who are able to give birth but who aren’t women. Birthing person is inclusive of women and everyone else. I don’t understand the problem.
It also doesn’t refer to cis women who are unable to give birth for any variety of reasons. It’s specifically not referring to a pretty sizable group of cis women while also including people who aren’t cis women, because cis women aren’t the ones being referred to; birthing people are.
Didn’t even think about that, that’s a valid point. Thank you for bringing that up.
Why is it ok to force a descriptor on a group of people that do not identify with said term?
Because it is meant to be used in healthcare care settings in reference to groups of people. It is a way more accurate and complete description of the cohort. Nobody is going around calling individual women “birthing people.” Midler took a term out of context and tried to claim people are trying to erase women, which is classic TERF behavior
Oh, I’m sure she’s still very pro-LGB. Most TERFs are (for now at least). It’s the T part of the equation that they think it’s acceptable to hate
TERFs may be the dumbest people alive. How are you going to be all about equality and acceptance after literally thousands of years of women being mistreated, only to turn around and do that to a different group and see no problem with it? Absolutely mindless.
Sounds like her issue is with terms like birthing person rather than cis-woman.
Those complaints originated in TERF circles
Ok that doesn’t completely strip them of validity. I get why she would prefer to be calked a woman and take issue with her being assigned a different term just like I get why a transwoman would want to be called a woman rather than having a different term they do not identify with assigned to them.
But they are not equivalent. People that erase trans people read it like that and project. In a medical setting, the biology is important and the language makes sure all parts involved are included in the conversation.
This begs the question why is it acceptable to assign terms to people they do not identify as? Your comment would make sense in medical discussions about people giving birth but that’s not how it is being used.
It does not beg that question because that is literally how it is being used. Your continued hammering of that point is simply untrue and feels incredibly disingenuous since multiple people have told you that is how it is being used
It is being used to describe someone in a way they would prefer not to be used for them. Is this really that hard to see the overt hypocrisy in?
This feels like giving these people—some of whom you haven’t otherwise thought of in years—free press for being pieces of shit.
Why not do write ups on people not sucking?
I have never heard of Harry Jowsey, but if this write-up about him is accurate, it sounds like the author found nine celebrities making transphobic comments and then just added this random homophobe so that the headline could say 10? Am I missing something?
It was someone the author knew from school.
This’ll show 'em
Ha ha! Not because I haven’t heard of him, I meant the article’s description of him is that he dated a trans woman and is supportive of transwomen.
The thing he did that’s phobic, according to this article, is he called James Charles a f****, which is homophobic, not transphobic.
Ironically when I googled this I found James Charles seems to have said some transphobic things about not being 100% gay because he is attracted to transgender men. Maybe he could take this list slot.
- valentino ( @valentino@lemmy.ml ) 3•10 months ago
Great celebrities
Oh for fuck’s sake. Everybody needs to calm down. Why is everyone starting using a magnifying glass to find any comment by a celebrity that doesn’t 100% align with their own beliefs.
It seems like the word transphobe is slapped onto anyone and anything that offers a dissenting opinion or doesn’t align completely with this week’s LGBTQ newsletter.
I support LGBTQ rights. But I don’t agree with everything. This “you’re either with us or against us” rhetoric is basically the same as the republicans use.