Tumgik
#I’m being a bit hyperbolic but I seriously just saw this type of argument on tiktok and I was speechless
duskcowboy · 1 year
Text
It’s just so funny to me that they accuse us of being toxic when our arguments compare like this:
Elriel: “I think they’re endgame because there’s books of foreshadowing, and I don’t like gw*nriel because there’s no build up and it feels like a mentee/mentor relationship.”
Gw*nriel: “I think they’re endgame because they both have trauma and should be mates, and I hate elriel because Elain is stupid, unworthy, and boring.”
Do they seriously not see the difference? Jfc
53 notes · View notes
velvyy · 5 years
Text
bit of a rant oof
If homophobes are so obsessed with the idea of gay people or gayness being “unnatural” I gotta say I hope they aren’t relying on technology because lemme tell you something about modern day manufacturing, television, laptops, and taking showers.
I really don’t understand and see how this argument holds up because it falls apart once you realize all these people mentioning homosexuality being unnatural are probably pro-capitalist, and capitalism being the driving force behind unnatural establishments of workers producing industrial and manufactured goods whilst allowing your CEO, boss, etc, to accumulate masses of wealth despite already being well off as it is.And before I hear “Our urge to be aggressively competitive is our nature!”, I’d like to point out that applies to those who are trying to survive in a society where certain resources may be scarce. Of course you’re going to fight for them if it’s a life or death situation unless, you find a way to be mutual about it and establish a more cooperative way of surviving that serves to benefit both parties. We aren’t so simple-minded that we just look at things as a kill or be killed situation. This type of rhetoric and logic is used to justify the existence of billionaires whilst also being based on a very twisted rendition of evolutionary theory. Saying that it’s in our nature to do what we must to survive is not the same as saying that mass accumulation of wealth to such an extent it drains resources from those who need it is justified, because one could argue that our desire to survive can lead us to find a solution in mutual aid, cooperation, and autonomy rather than being overly competitive and creating foes where it might be unnecessary. Sure, we can also be greedy, but to what end do we allow our greed to become so overwhelming that it negatively effects the entire world’s population? In a smaller, agrarian society, I figure those who would try and accumulate a mass majority of resources would be shunned and potentially expelled from said society. In our current society, we’re convinced that billionaires are some kind of benevolent being who keeps the good will of the people in mind, but of course, as history has shown, the establishment of hierarchy and accumulation of power inevitably corrupts those to such a degree that it negatively affects anyone who isn’t considered an “elite” and with no democracy existent in the workplace, I’d hardly call our CEOs benevolent just like I’d hardly call Monarchs benevolent. Although the UK proves they haven’t moved past the worshiping of Monarchs..
 I fail to see how the unnatural mass accumulation of wealth, by unnatural means of production, those things being made in unnatural and industrial settings, and being distributed by unnatural means, is even remotely human nature, and I’d even argue that this “human nature” argument is honestly arbitrary once you realize humans are heavily influenced and are adaptable to their environment, but I digress.
Humanity isn’t so simple to kind of just boil us down to the idea that we exist solely to mate with those of the opposite sex and make children who will then do the same in later years, and I fail to see how viewing humanity in such a way isn’t limiting and restrictive. Whether or not a man can love another man really isn’t a problem. All these reactionary worries of undermining traditional values and marriage is just mere fearmongering. No one who’s actually straight is just going to decide to not get married because their gay next door neighbor got married. Raising children won’t be undermined, nor will the idea of “family” be undermined. The issue arises when reactionaries seemingly want some arbitrary reason to exclude gay people from normal life due to preconceived notions and archaic beliefs that are more than a millennia old at this point, and these people are seemingly fine with government intervention when it suits to enable discrimination, but once it does the opposite, now we have a discussion about civil liberty and rights, because apparently those who aren’t disadvantaged the same way others are, are now being systemically and institutionally oppressed because gay people can hold a big fancy wedding and live in the same suburban neighborhood. Some even try to make it some faux feminist issue, making claims of how gay men getting married is somehow a result of men appropriating femininity and what it means to be a woman.
I mean, The AAP, APA, NASW, and AMA seem to disagree with those who try to undermine people who aren’t straight, but for some reason we’re still having this debate all because of gay characters being represented in films and current properties, and this is quite recent really. Gay character pops up in a comic book or film, all the incel-esque fanboys of whatever property they’re into lose their shit and begin to make conspiracy theories about cultural marxism and the end of civilization as we know it. Apparently sucking dick is going to destroy all of the order established in the world, despite the order in the world ironically being built off the pillaging and ransacking and oppressing of other groups across the world. The SJW propaganda wants to undermine straight people by including people who aren’t like me oh noes. The SJW communists have taken over every individual industry ever in the history of everything, and now my kids are going to become gay! What a tragedy! I need to become an online reactionary activist and pretend I’m an intellectual because I cite evidence whilst misinterpreting it and then make claims about how I trigger the libs!
You might think I’m being seriously hyperbolic here, but I’ve seen conservatives and centrists on Youtube speak EXACTLY like this, and it baffles me that people take these kinds of people seriously. I don’t think I’d look at a movie that just so happens to have an all straight cast and think “THE STRAIGHT AGENDA” because that’s nonsense. Marxists owning means of production only to use it for spreading a progressive message about how gays are pretty ok? Marxists wouldn’t take over businesses. They’d either destroy them or establish worker’s cooperatives out of them, and sorry, but DC, Marvel, and all these other big entertainment distributors? None of them are destroyed or workers co-ops, and if they were, it wouldn’t be because of Marxists going against their own values to prove some point about how capitalism sucks. Capitalism does that by itself. Your kids can’t just majestically turn gay because they saw a comic strip of Spiderman kissing Deadpool. If your kid is gay, that’s just because he just is.His attraction is something he can’t help and feels rather natural to him, and to him, would feel unnatural to constantly be told that their attraction is evil and wrong, and is somehow being enabled by the media they consume. If anything, the media they consume helps them realize themselves better and I see no negatives with that. Triggering the libs? Most “progressives” or leftists typically acknowledge that certain things being said or represented are in poor taste. I don’t like cancel culture, but me saying that someone shouldn’t call someone a faggot isn’t me being “ultra triggered liberal sjw”, it’s just me saying that such vernacular derives from the dehumanization of a certain group of people, and it’s not your word to own. When you say it in a such a way, we know what you mean, and it’s not helpful to you or I. That’s not me telling you to go die, and if your reaction to that is more vitriol, then maybe you’re the one who’s offended by me making an honest point. Sorry if your tunnel vision view of societal norms and the way we as people treat each other originates from cowardly centrists from Youtube, or reactionaries.
I’m genuinely and honestly tired of this debate surrounding whether or not I have the right to exist and be free from discrimination. I can’t fathom why so many people think my right to exist is somehow a violation of their own rights to such a degree that they think they need to undermine mine, and I’m especially tired of these same people arguing that something I can’t help is unnatural despite many of these people consuming and being surrounded by things that actually are unnatural, and made by unnatural means. Also tired of the bs surrounding entertainment and this whole charade regarding fake outrage surrounding gay people in films. Admittedly I do have a problem with companies using LGBT representation as a mere commodity for liberal consumer points, but that’s not a problem with being gay as much as it’s a problem with companies being soulless husks as corporate entities with no regard for humanity. And I’m really tired of having buzzwords thrown my way as a way to shut down conversation, and then have these people pretend they owned me in some hypothetical debate. Sexuality and the way it’s shaped through genetics, environment, the structure of our brain, etc, is a very complex subject, and it irks me that people really want to find any way to disregard science to try and justify their bigotry only to claim they aren’t bigoted in any way.
2 notes · View notes