• 7 Posts
Joined 2 months ago
Cake day: May 7th, 2024


  • Coming out the closet isn’t a choice but it is a decision

    Oh stupid me not considering the minute difference between a choice and a decision between two or more options. So glad we’re arguing in good faith here…

    I’ll make sure to let the pro-choice crowd know that women are actually choosing between terminating an ectopic pregnancy or death, so they better start calling themselves pro-decision. /s

    The choice is to come out or commit suicide.

    That’s right, there’s no such thing as a closeted person. You’re either straight, gay, or dead. Excellent take, closeted queer people literally don’t exist… /s

    You can come out of the closet. You can stay in the closet. You can live a life without companionship. You can live a heteronormative lie. And yes, you can kill yourself, technically an option that is always available…

    These are still choices, and you shouldn’t want them taken away, you should want individual freedom to choose how you live your life, and ideally a society that encourages you to follow the path of your choosing. Any entity that seeks to bind your decision making power is taking away your choices.

    As I already said, queerness isn’t a choice, people have little conscious control over their attractions and identity. The right wingers who are your enemies are going to look at all the choices a queer person has in life and they are going to one by one criminalize those things until you have no rights anymore.

    Clinging to idpol narratives instead of fighting tooth and nail for your individual liberties and freedoms is a fundamental mistake, because those liberties and freedoms will disappear until it doesn’t matter if the law isn’t written directly to oppress you, you will be fully oppressed.

  • Okay, but what if the state used your argument to make it a crime to flap your arms in an attempt to fly?

    Would you argue that such a law was justified, because you have no intention of flapping your arms, and have no impression that doing so would give you the ability to fly?

    If someone attempted, futilely, to fly by flapping their arms, and got arrested for conspiracy to violate the laws of gravity, would you defend their prosecution?

    Or should people be allowed to do whatever they choose to do, no matter what other people think of it? Does it matter if humans can’t fly on whether or not we try? Is “flightless” a status we have to enforce with state power?

    But I digress, your “you can’t be trans-species and fly like a bird” argument is coming very close to the various “you can’t change how you were born” arguments made by transphobes: Intentionally ridiculous, and doesn’t stand up to scrutiny…

  • Humoring a position and reaching the same conclusion anyway is just a fun way of saying that the position doesn’t matter.

    In this case individual liberty overrules anyone else’s personal objection, regardless of whether the thing they are opposed to is a choice or not.

    But I’ll make this my last comment as this sub is clearly a circlejerk, and not a place for nuanced conversation like I thought.

    Clearly I hit a nerve, but the downvotes make it clear: unpopular opinions aren’t actually welcome here, they get shouted down in favor of more trivial things like whether or not a hot dog is a sandwich.

    Oh well, y’all’s loss. I’ll find a better community somewhere else.

  • I understand that. Being queer is not a choice.

    But if you argue simple stuff like “you choose your partner” or “you choose to come out of the closet”, you get pushback because people are fixated on only one narrow application of the word “choice”.

    Humoring the bigots leads me to the same conclusion: even if being queer was a choice, it’s a choice we should be allowed to make in a free country. Philosophical discussions about the nature of queerness notwithstanding.

  • That is essentially my point.

    At the core of the “being queer is not a choice” argument is that being queer is a kind of person. That queer people are born queer.

    With that mindset, it becomes very easy to decide that LGBT rights are rights for LGBT people, rather than the right to make the kinds of personal choices that LGBT people are likely to make. Anti-LGBT laws bind all of us equally, but affect LGBT people disproportionately.

    Republicans can’t stop you from being gay, but they can criminalize every life choice a gay person would make to pursue happiness, cutting you off from that right.

    If we act like choice isn’t a factor, how do we protect our right to choose for ourselves? Taking away our right to choice is the first step in restricting our right to self actualization.

    The far right wants the only choice you’re allowed to make to be marrying a member of the opposite sex and identifying as the gender that matches your sex. Coming out of the closet is a choice, and they want to take that choice away.

  • If everyone has freedom of choice, then everyone is receiving equal treatment.

    I don’t understand the disconnect here.

    The entire label of being “queer” is just an abstraction on choice. You choose who you date. You choose whether or not to come out of the closet. You don’t choose your attractions, but your sexuality as it is understood by others is based on the kind of person you would choose to pursue, which is influenced directly by your attractions. We then align ourselves with others with similar attractions to maximize our choices.

    Dating and building serious relationships is all an exercise in making choices and deciding what you want out of life, and the core of sexual orientation is the kind of partner that you would choose to pursue.

    If we reject the importance of choice solely because we fear the misunderstanding that sexual attraction itself is a choice, we risk having the right to our attractions and nothing else.

    One would never argue that freedom of speech is limited to simply making sounds with your mouth. Freedom of speech is the freedom to say whatever you choose to say without being held legally liable for your ideas. Likewise, sexual freedom must include the freedom to choose whatever kind of partner and relationship you wish to pursue.

  • I don’t really know what government you’re talking about, but I’m referring to modern western governments that have historically oppressed queer people, continue to do so today, and where there are politicians who advocate for more oppression.

    Ideally the government wouldn’t give a shit about my personal life and would stay the fuck out of it and let me make decisions for myself. My government right now is not an impersonal government, it is a government that actively binds me and wants to exert even more control.

    As I said, choice is fundamental to freedom. The more choices you let the state make on your behalf, the less freedom you have.

  • Lots of heartless people in the comments who didn’t read her side of this. Honestly, I sympathize with her almost entirely.

    She didn’t know she was pregnant. This is something that happens to women of her size sometimes. Not all pregnancies have the telltale symptoms. Sometimes you learn about your pregnancy as you’re going into labor.

    It’s rare, but it absolutely happens.

    She went from having a normal evening, to giving a natural birth alone in her apartment in a matter of about 20 minutes. She went from thinking she was having cramps to holding her newborn baby.

    Within 10 minutes the baby had been dropped out of a window.

    The amount of trauma this woman experienced, combined with the extreme and often immediate postpartum mental health issues, including psychosis, absolutely led to her making a completely irrational and tragic decision. I find it hard to swallow that she deserves punishment as if this were a long thought out plan to kill a child. This was a poorly handled crisis handled by a traumatized woman in a fugue state. She was not in a sound state of mind.

    She doesn’t deserve prison, she deserves compassion for what she’s suffered and treatment for her mental ailments.

    That they interrogated her and used her panic over her career against her as if she schemed to kill a child to further her career is honestly a disgusting angle to try to punish this woman. They opportunistically grilled a woman experiencing trauma so that they could throw the book at her.

  • How on earth does having the choice to date / have sex with / marry people freely, without regard to gender, “imply that you can trick yourself into/decide not to be queer and still have a fulfilled life”? I never said anything to that effect.

    Freedom of choice doesn’t preclude one from making choices that don’t lead to happiness. We live with the outcomes of the choices we make. In the literal sense, you do have the right to delude yourself and live a miserable repressed life, but that doesn’t mean I advocate for people to live that way.

    I’m not offering a solution to sexual repression, if I could I would. I’m offering a different way of thinking about your freedom of gender and sexuality that enshrines your ability to choose how to live your own life without others forcing your hand.

    EDIT: For additional context, let me throw my own experience out there. I consider myself a straight man, but I was once bi-curious. I experimented, and had a sexual encounter with a male classmate in college. I don’t regret it, if anything I am very confident in my sexuality in part because I explored it thoroughly. Gay sex is completely demystified because I had it, so I literally can’t see it as some other kind of sex.

    But that doesn’t make me a queer person, that’s for me to decide. I wasn’t born a certain way that makes me different. What I did was a choice that better enabled me to understand my own sexuality. Without that choice, or if I had been punished for that choice, and my life would probably not be the great thing it is today.

    The first thing anti-LGBT people target is choice. Choices on what books you can read. Choices on what questions you can ask. Choices on exploring yourself. If they can take those choices away, they can force you to be whatever kind of person they want you to be.

  • a lot of people actually were curious about it.

    I mean, sure, if a Cybertruck parked next to me somewhere, I’d probably take a close look and talk to the owner if they were around. I’m curious as much as anyone.

    I don’t have high expectations, and I’m not interested in owning one, but I’d still check it out.

    But that’s just because these cars are rare and novel. If anything, the questions I’d ask would be tilted towards figuring out just how shitty a car it is.

    If the police are roaming around in them, they become less novel, and generally speaking people aren’t usually interested in approaching random cops for conversations. People who socialize around cars usually aren’t a big fan of the cops.

    most people aren’t online enough to have an opinion about Musk and his bullshit

    I don’t understand this point. Not only does Elon Musk’s bullshit appear regularly on boomer tv stations, but you don’t have to be very online to get exhausted with Musk content. It’s not exactly niche content, he owns Twitter and is constantly attracting media attention with dumb stunts. You have to go out of your way to avoid hearing about him.

    to them it’s just an interesting looking car.

    Anyone interested enough in cars to be influenced by what kind of car the cops drive, is someone likely informed enough to know that the Cybertruck is a misengineered lemon of a car.

  • Buddy, every police department with a flashy sports car has the same story.

    Let me know how many facts I get right about it:

    1. You learned about it as a teenager because the police came to your school to show it off.
    2. You lived in a mostly white suburban town.
    3. The car had anti-drug messages on it.
    4. The car was confiscated from a drug dealer, and transferred to the police department through civil asset forfeiture.
    5. The “drug dealer” was a Black man who was caught with some arbitrary amount of weed that forces baseless “intent to distribute” charges.

  • Without fail, another anti-LGBT Republican with stories about “sexual confusion” and “the temptation of same-sex relations” that all but confirm that they are queer and closeted.

    A coworker of mine once tried to pick my brain on gay marriage say something to the effect of “people like you and I wouldn’t be resisting the urge if we didn’t know it was wrong”. I had to pop his bubble by explaining to him that I had never felt the temptation to be gay ever in my life because I am straight, but if I really wanted dick I’d seek it out because sex is fun and I’ll have it with anyone if think it will be mutually enjoyable.

    He literally couldn’t wrap his brain around the idea that I was completely willing to have sex with any person that struck my fancy, but that men were never even a consideration. He was experiencing the exact opposite.

    Needless to say, he’s still deeply closeted, but he doesn’t bring up gay marriage stuff anymore to me because I think I gave him an ongoing existential crisis. I hope he figures it out eventually…

    But statistically, once you’re so deep in the closet that you’ve convinced yourself that everyone wants gay sex, and only “sinners” give into that urge, you’re probably not in the path to figuring anything out. Unfortunately, these people always vote for Fascism, constructing the prison that they themselves will be locked in.