Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
White straight people are normal.in the US.
Why do you think we call minorities minorities?
Are minorities normal?
Is it normal to enjoy crossword puzzles?
Is it normal to prefer yellow as your favorite color?
Is it normal to drive a lifted truck?
Is it normal to drive an electric car?
Is it normal to be female?
I made no such assumptions. I would stand up against anyone trying to other you as well. And I have addressed the content of your posts in each of my replies to you. I really have no idea why you would think I haven't.
Further, a careful reading of my post would reveal I didn't ascribe your stance to evil or malice, but to ignorance.
whoosh
that aside
othering is not inherently wrong
i see kids don't get othered today and think it's bad for them - been coaching some peewee baseball lately and the amount of crying and helicopter parenting is truly bizarre - we're nurturing an entire generation that all lacks character and breaks down in tears at the most minor of difficulties because there's always a doting parent there ready to fix the problem by asking the school to bring in counselors, asking the restaurant to change the menu, etc
the best possible outcome for a trans child is to understand that yes they are different but that's ok - going to be a lot easier to grow up understanding that rather than be gaslit into believing that they embody the standard and normal experience - they should be prepared for confusion and awkward questions same as I am whenever my various maladies come out in the open
In my mind, the best way for society to balance this is that all children should be treated as normal, but essential values will be undermined if all adults are treated as normal.
That doesn’t mean that ultimately not everyone is equal (see my posts in the equality thread), but not all identities are equal, and therefore, not all identities should be treated as normal in adults.
Again, this issue is a major problem when people replace the self with certain identities (racial, trans, etc). This is fine to do in children but we are supposed to outgrow this.
In my mind, the best way for society to balance this is that all children should be treated as normal, but essential values will be undermined if all adults are treated as normal.That doesn’t mean that ultimately not everyone is equal (see my posts in the equality thread), but not all identities are equal, and therefore, not all identities should be treated as normal in adults.
when you treat everyone as normal you get people like craig
i rest my case
Another way of saying it, fitting in and being normal is the highest meaning for children, but it shouldn’t be the highest meaning for adults.
People with abnormal identities or life situations (I put myself in this category) are supposed to search for higher life meanings rather than try to cling to the lower meaning of fitting in as normal.
The problem with the world "normal" is that if you refer to the majority as "normal" you can then refer to a minority as "abnormal".
Think about how that might feel.
Are minorities normal?
Is it normal to enjoy crossword puzzles?
Is it normal to prefer yellow as your favorite color?
Is it normal to drive a lifted truck?
Is it normal to drive an electric car?
Is it normal to be female?
None of those things are normal.
The definition was posted at the top of the page.
A normal person is not a minority. They probably do enjoy things but those things are probably not crossword puzzles. They might drive a lifted truck but they probably don't. They probably do have a favorite color but it's likely blue. They probably don't drive a lifted truck or an electric car-- probably they have a Honda civic. And the female question is a moot one.
It’s important to understand that there are two discussions happening.
One side is discussing normality and the other side is combining equality with normality and discussing both.
It might be true that you can’t make any headway with the normality discussion until you figure out the equality part first.
Incorrect.
Let's start with the simplest one to dispell, then we can move down the list if we need to.
The definition posted was "conforming to a standard, usual, typical, or expected."
I think it is pretty clear that being female fits at least one of those 4 things. At the very least, it is expected for there to be females. I would also argue that being female conforms to a standard (it is standard for there to be males and females populating the planet), it is quite usual to be female or for there to be females, and being female is certainly not atypical.
All the other things on my list are also normal by these definitions, incidentally, but it's particularly stunning to see you deny that being female is normal in a desperate attempt to claim it's only for majorities (which is never hinted at in any of the definitions).
Incorrect.Let's start with the simplest one to dispell, then we can move down the list if we need to.The definition posted was "conforming to a standard, usual, typical, or expected."I think it is pretty clear that being female fits at least one of those 4 things. At the very least, it is expected for there to be females. I would also argue that being female conforms to a stand
Females aren't a part of some continuum. They're a part of a bimodal sex system. (Or dichotomous actually)
Is this your first time here?
Is it really that ridiculous to people that a person hearing that they're not normal will commonly make that person feel like there's something wrong with them?
Pointing out the issue with using "normal" to refer to people with a certain characteristic has nothing to do with implying malicious intent, it's purely a case of considering the (unintentional) impact that your choice of language could have on someone outside of that "norm" who might be struggling with their identity. This can be aplpied to a huge range of things such as sexual orientation, gender, mental illness, race, hobbies etc.
The problem with the world "normal" is that if you refer to the majority as "normal" you can then refer to a minority as "abnormal".
Think about how that might feel.
the minority is by definition abnormal
again, this is like being offended when someone points out the sky is blue because that may offend people whose favorite color is green
Is it really that ridiculous to people that a person hearing that they're not normal will commonly make that person feel like there's something wrong with them?Pointing out the issue with using "normal" to refer to people with a certain characteristic has nothing to do with implying malicious intent, it's purely a case of considering the (unintentional) impact that your choice
Is the solution in your mind to have no norms?
If so, have you thought through the implications?
Is it really that ridiculous to people that a person hearing that they're not normal will commonly make that person feel like there's something wrong with them?
There are a lot of things not normal with me. Many are positive, but a few are probably not. There is nothing wrong with me.
Knowing multiple people (including myself) who have dealt with that exact thing I can assure you it is not uncommon for it to have that effect on people. It's mostly an issue with children but it's also very common with mental health issues in adults, where "knowing" that it's not normal to feel the way they do can make dealing with/getting help for the issues significantly more difficult. Normalising these things that aren't experienced by a majority but don't mean something is wrong with a person affected makes acknowledging and dealing with them in healthy ways much, much easier.
The problem is that while yes, by and large straight people or straight white people, depending on location are the statistical norm, being not labelled as "normal" is often used in a pejorative manner. Therefore trans people aren't "normal", with the implication that they're mentally ill, perverted etc. I feel there's an implicit implication of "pervy trans people" in recent discussions re toilets for example. It's not outright stated but it's there. I'm all but certain mongidig meant it in a pejorative sense in his original objection to calling dudes cis gender, as cisgender are simply normal dudes, not abnormal/mentally ill/pervy like those whackadoodle trans folk, possibly gay people too.
So it's perfectly understandable that anyone outside the statistical norm, would feel annoyed or upset to be referred to as not normal.
