Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
No one is normal all of the time.
No one is abnormal all of the time.
This discussion highlights another reason why a unifying national identity is essential.
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.
I agree entirely for myself nowadays, but that's not an argument that it can't make some people feel otherwise. There have been times in my life where I have been struggling with mental health issues and the idea that it wasn't normal to be feeling the way I was did in fact make me feel like there was something wrong with me and that stigma that I felt made it much harder than it would have otherwise been to get help.
There are obviously things society does deem as being abnormal and wrong, which I realise is what craig is getting at, and that can be a sensible thing in some cases (some psycopathies, prejudices etc.). However when the the thing being referred to is not something that we think is inherently wrong then the implication that it is abnormal can be harmful so in those cases I advocate for using different language.
I agree entirely for myself nowadays, but that's not an argument that it can't make some people feel otherwise. There have been times in my life where I have been struggling with mental health issues and the idea that it wasn't normal to be feeling the way I was did in fact make me feel like there was something wrong with me and that stigma that I felt made it much harder than
Identity is a difficult topic but it’s probably the most important topic.
Minorities are not abnormal by definition.
"deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying."
Neither the definition of normal nor abnormal implies minorities can't be normal or are abnormal.
whooshthat asideothering is not inherently wrongi 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 par
That's... not what "othering" even means.
Minorities are not abnormal by definition.
"deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying."
Neither the definition of normal nor abnormal implies minorities can't be normal or are abnormal.
Lol Gorgo.
Probably you should just stick to bad science and leave semantics for others.
I can trace my ancestors to three different continents.
I'm an ultra minority. The only people like me are my brothers.
I'm super abnormal as a result of that.
Hard to believe that people on either side are getting worked up about this. He obviously (to me anyway) used the term because it was specifically in the context of people at a salon, where you might expect a greater proportion of trans (and gay) men than in a generic place. I probably would have even said "cishet" in that context, and I have never used that term except on this
Pretty much the only time I've used the term in my life outside of a discussion specifically about gender. But what do you know, it came in handy and you understood the reason. But snowflakes gonna snowflake, God forbid language to evolve.
Definitions.of words just isn't your strong suite. I'm sure I'm not the first one to tell you this.
You about done with the ad hominem bs or is this going to keep going for awhile?
I'm not impressed with this kind of stupidity when you could just participate in the discussion. That you are choosing to do this instead is telling. It must not be your strong "suite."
You about done with the ad hominem bs or is this going to keep going for awhile?
I'm not impressed with this kind of stupidity when you could just participate in the discussion. That you are choosing to do this instead is telling. It must not be your strong "suite."
Participating in a discussion with someone who has no clue what the word normal means and is aggressively wrong about it isn't that interesting to me. More fun just to laugh.
Despite what I said earlier, the desire to belong is universal and must be addressed.
How I reconcile it in myself is I aim my desire to belong toward a future version of humanity.
Without this ability to locate your belonging in the future, then you will either (1) become too anti-social or (2) there will be a drive for each of your identities to belong in the present.
Society has an interest in keeping everyone pro-social. While at the same time, society cannot accommodate and accept every identity /aspect of every person as normal. Therefore, society must promote a future version of humanity with which the marginalized should aim their desire for belonging.
This is my takeaway.
In some places the dominant political group are minorities like the Alawites under Assad in Syria so that can happen.
The majority however can never be minorities by definition.
If no group is greater than 49% than the minority groups will depend on alliances and what you count.
We can all be minorities on different things.
Sounds normal to me.
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?
.
I think the problem there is that you're inadvertently opening up the door for insecurity when attempt to "normalize" or bridge two different things - it's like you're attempting to lessen a person's own differences which is hugely offensive. You're invalidating real differences with dishonesty that will still lead people feeling out of place. Throw out the word normal if you want, but maybe not so much that it no longer acknowledges their reality or invalidates their own unique experiences.
It goes back to people addressing their own differences and uniqueness rather than trying to fit into what's "normal" in the same way that you don't tell your left handed child to write with the other hand or tell a little person to wear 6 inch lifters to fit in.
I think the problem there is that you're inadvertently opening up the door for insecurity when attempt to "normalize" or bridge two different things - it's like you're attempting to lessen a person's own differences which is hugely offensive. You're invalidating real differences with dishonesty that will still lead people feeling out of place. Throw out the word normal if you
I have absolutely no issue with someone defining themselves in a way that makes them different from "normal". If someone wants to play up some unique or different aspect of themselves as being a major part of their identity then I would be fully supportive of that. The only motivation behind my arguments is trying to avoid perpetuating the implied stigma that can be caused by the implication that these less common characteristics/issues are abnormal and in fact people highlighting that aspect of themselves in a positive and empowering way only goes to furthering the same cause.
Despite what I said earlier, the desire to belong is universal and must be addressed. How I reconcile it in myself is I aim my desire to belong toward a future version of humanity.Without this ability to locate your belonging in the future, then you will either (1) become too anti-social or (2) there will be a drive for each of your identities to belong in the present.Society h
This is my progressive vision, and I’m realizing the core disagreement I have with progressives is over how to solve the equality / desire to belong issue for the marginalized.
Progressives want to take power from and humble traditional norms, often replacing them with new norms, but I don’t see this as an acceptable solution. We’ve seen some of the harmful consequences of this already (which includes reawakening right wing extremism).
The only real lasting solution is through (true) self identification and (true) self actualization. Yet, I’m finding the strongest pushback I receive on my progressive vision is from progressives themselves.
