no litany of facts can convince the transphobe that someone assigned male at birth may well and truly be female,
well, in terms of truscum, MRI studies seem to do that; but there might be some motivated reasoning going on there, as it's just as easy to find differences between cis- and trans- counterparts as it is to find similarities.
I've had some odd success changing online reactionaries minds by framing transsexualism as 'intersex of the brain' or even a 'birth defect'†; although it gets them past the moral objections, they start frothing at the mouth with eugenicist zeal.
† wouldn't use those terms in general, but you sometimes gotta meet them at their level for any conversation to be possible.
when their expectations don’t align with what they view, they slip into the moral language of disgust,
that is an interesting point. (instead of updating their views they become oppositional)
once shown an empathetic view of the targets of their bigotries, taking into consideration their subjectivity, bigots almost always cease to be bigots.
yeah, but I'm not sure that empathy is really doing the legwork here; because these subjective accounts often contain new information.
an empathic subjective account of bestiality is probably not going to shift that many opinions. I mean yeah, that dachshund was totally asking for it, but still, what the fuck.
if it were merely descriptive, they would not choose to act to reassert the category.
but in the case of say Peterson, his position is that non-binary gender identification either is symptomatic of (or inevitably results in) mental health issues.
from that descriptive position, a prescriptive move against non-binary identification could simply be a utilitarian or consequentialist one.
I am not at all dismissing that there is a prescriptive element to "only two genders", that is almost invariably the case, but I object to the notion that our side alone is being descriptive.
the subject/object designation is key
but I know how to empathize with fascists, seeing them as subjects, understanding how they got so messed up; but that doesn't at all stop me from hating, opposing, or objectifying them either.
If we look at for example KF (an online harassment, doxing, and primarily observation for the lulz form), I don't think it is entirely honest to say they must lack subjective insight, their position is sadistic not objectifying.
Even the worst of the TERFs are more intent on inflicting harm sadistically than on putting the world right. But at that point we're dealing with psychopathology, not ordinary bigots.
your view of prescription almost eliminates [subject/object] entirely
we are but atoms in the dance of nature. my want for an icy popsicle is merely a fact about my brain, my choice to open the freezer is merely an event in time out of reach. /s
but you're right that subject/object is not of primary importance in how I think about these things; I'm not convinced that it should be.
I mean, even like the KKK, there is no sense in which you can throw a brick through someone's window without having a subjective account of how it affects them; the whole point of terrorizing people is using that subject view towards objective ends.
So for me, the objective aspect will always have primacy. I don't believe there is a failure to empathize, but a failure to understand, which leads to inaccurate or badly contextualized subjective accounts.
Everybody knows that BLM are unhappy, afraid, desperate for change; a subjective view into what it is like to be Black in America can amount to "sucks for them", it doesn't imply self-pitying white voters are going to help.
The way capitalist healthcare massively harms people isn't enough to budge many conservative voters either; they seem perfectly content with Social Darwinism.
Beyond that, people can be indifferent to the subjective altogether; as in the slogan "fuck your feelings" which to me is not avoiding the subjective, but discounting it as irrelevant.
They way in which the alt-right revels in lib-left misery seems to me quite the opposite of objectification.
I'm sure that many, many, people have gone from ignorance via empathy to holding better political opinions; but if that were really enough I don't think there would be many conservatives left.
I suppose my view of human nature is darker than most.
Anyway, some of this has gotten rather abstract, and I might have misunderstood what you were getting at, and there is far too much to be said on all these topics, but I can feel events transpiring in my brain such that *post*
well, in terms of truscum, MRI studies seem to do that; but there might be some motivated reasoning going on there, as it's just as easy to find differences between cis- and trans- counterparts as it is to find similarities.
I've had some odd success changing online reactionaries minds by framing transsexualism as 'intersex of the brain' or even a 'birth defect'†; although it gets them past the moral objections, they start frothing at the mouth with eugenicist zeal.
† wouldn't use those terms in general, but you sometimes gotta meet them at their level for any conversation to be possible.
that is an interesting point. (instead of updating their views they become oppositional)
yeah, but I'm not sure that empathy is really doing the legwork here; because these subjective accounts often contain new information.
an empathic subjective account of bestiality is probably not going to shift that many opinions. I mean yeah, that dachshund was totally asking for it, but still, what the fuck.
but in the case of say Peterson, his position is that non-binary gender identification either is symptomatic of (or inevitably results in) mental health issues.
from that descriptive position, a prescriptive move against non-binary identification could simply be a utilitarian or consequentialist one.
I am not at all dismissing that there is a prescriptive element to "only two genders", that is almost invariably the case, but I object to the notion that our side alone is being descriptive.
but I know how to empathize with fascists, seeing them as subjects, understanding how they got so messed up; but that doesn't at all stop me from hating, opposing, or objectifying them either.
If we look at for example KF (an online harassment, doxing, and primarily observation for the lulz form), I don't think it is entirely honest to say they must lack subjective insight, their position is sadistic not objectifying.
Even the worst of the TERFs are more intent on inflicting harm sadistically than on putting the world right. But at that point we're dealing with psychopathology, not ordinary bigots.
we are but atoms in the dance of nature. my want for an icy popsicle is merely a fact about my brain, my choice to open the freezer is merely an event in time out of reach. /s
but you're right that subject/object is not of primary importance in how I think about these things; I'm not convinced that it should be.
I mean, even like the KKK, there is no sense in which you can throw a brick through someone's window without having a subjective account of how it affects them; the whole point of terrorizing people is using that subject view towards objective ends.
So for me, the objective aspect will always have primacy. I don't believe there is a failure to empathize, but a failure to understand, which leads to inaccurate or badly contextualized subjective accounts.
Everybody knows that BLM are unhappy, afraid, desperate for change; a subjective view into what it is like to be Black in America can amount to "sucks for them", it doesn't imply self-pitying white voters are going to help.
The way capitalist healthcare massively harms people isn't enough to budge many conservative voters either; they seem perfectly content with Social Darwinism.
Beyond that, people can be indifferent to the subjective altogether; as in the slogan "fuck your feelings" which to me is not avoiding the subjective, but discounting it as irrelevant.
They way in which the alt-right revels in lib-left misery seems to me quite the opposite of objectification.
I'm sure that many, many, people have gone from ignorance via empathy to holding better political opinions; but if that were really enough I don't think there would be many conservatives left.
I suppose my view of human nature is darker than most.
Anyway, some of this has gotten rather abstract, and I might have misunderstood what you were getting at, and there is far too much to be said on all these topics, but I can feel events transpiring in my brain such that *post*