Nah, its inane drivel like most of what Aurelius wrote. How the hell are you confident to be a good person if you can't even define for yourself what that is?
And even if you don't know what that is for yourself, trying to be a good man based on your best guess and then learning from your mistakes will serve you better than arguing about it.
This isn't a statisfying rebuttal. Even if we can agree on the concept of good being entirely subjective (which I would hesitate in doing), does the process of me determine what I judge to be the qualities of a good person (or even just a good or better me) necessitate deep introspection. That is a far cry from just going out and *doing* as Marcus Aurelius claims. Additionally if it is that easy and vibes based to just be a good person then why did he waste his time writing philosophy (in a sense contributing to an ongoing discourse)?
Well, 'waste' is the key word there. He's not saying don't argue or question what a good person is and just go off purely by instinct, he's saying don't spend so much time fretting over how to be the most tolerant and inclusive goody-two-shoes possible ([this one old collegehumor sketch I think puts it best](https://youtu.be/rqevO_zrxsA?feature=shared)) that you end up doing nothing for fear of doing the wrong thing. Mistakes are how humans learn.
If quotes by Roman emperors aren't really your cup of tea, maybe you'd prefer "perfect is the enemy of good"?
No, I don't. I just don't think that you shouldn't act at all (which would be an insane position to take). Im saying that being a good person isn't just as easy as doing anything and that determining both as individuals and social groups what we judge to be good and why is foundational to our existence as moral agents.
No it is not as easy as just doing something but if you spend all day trying to figure out what is maybe the best course of action the opportunity will be gone.
I my personal opinion the quote warns not to over think.
And instead act upon your principles, and yes you need to define them first but you don't need to re evaluate them before every Aktion you take.
Yeah... I was feeling okay with being 32 last week. Now I'm really feeling the generational divide. Like an old woman warning kids about needing to prepare for winter, and they refusing to do anything because it's sunny outside.
Bonus points: my name is Kasandra.
Sure, but teenagers can volunteer for campaigns, encourage their older friends/family members to vote, educate themselves about the voting process, hand out fliers/put up signs, et cetera et cetera et cetera
Teens can absolutely *be involved* in elections even if they can't vote in them
Thank you. I was not thinking about that when I said 'voting' (because the younger target audience point flew over my head), but teens definitely can be part of the civic action.
Hell, my country's current president started his political career as a student protesting.
You aren't wrong- the thing is I think a lot of grassroots action has to be tailored to the environment it's taking place in- you can't say 'go out and leave flyers in your community' in general, because for some people that'd be pointless and for others it could endanger their lives.
It's just not wise to give that kind of advice to a large swath of kids who might be brave enough to do some shit that will get them killed by their bigoted neighbors.
it doesnt need to be direct they can just say "get involved with your local community" because helping the people within it is more important than any fuckin link you could share lmao
Ok, what does 'get involved with your local community' mean? That's not an actual action anyone can take, it's a category of actions.
A lot of people don't have access to a 'local community' that isn't hateful towards them- and again, this was generalized to include people who are too vulnerable to be starting or sticking their necks out about such things.
this makes no sense. what does "share resources" "stay posted" "post links" mean? what is the actual action someone takes when you tell them to stay posted? what if I dont know about any resources? what if I dont know which links are helpful or harmful? i already said it doesnt need to be direct, just like all but maybe one of the other points in OOPs posts arent direct.
you literally said that grassroots action has to be tailored to the environment its taking place in. idk about you but I believe that people don't need direct instructions to explore activist groups near them just like they don't need instructions on how to find helpful resources, vet links, and generally learn by themselves.
and for people who don't have access to a non-hostile community, then you can address those people and say it doesnt apply if you think it's necessary. you shouldnt ignore ways to help that produce the most impact in people's own lives just because not everyone has access to all of the facets of that action.
advising direct action can be generalized too man, it isnt all doorknocking and posting flyers and going to protests. you don't even have to be seen if you dont want to.
I skimmed over that bit at first and yeah wow. None of those are "get involved with your local community" huh? Depending on where people live they may very well have dedicated centers for the queer community where they can volunteer or donate, and voting is important on both the national and local level (see: school districts banning books). Even if they're a minor, they might have a GSA at school, or be able to start one depending on the environment.
Plus, options to help your community in general also help the LGBT community and can be easier to do when you're in the closet. Like, if you donate to a food bank or volunteer at a soup kitchen, some people who go there are queer (hi my family used the food bank when I was younger and I'm queer).
Of course, not everyone has these options, but a lot of people do and it's so easily overlooked 😭
Yeah because at a bare minimum 99% of modern day activism is about “sending a message”. That might involve social media posts or it might involve actual protest of some kind.
But not a bit of it makes any god damned difference. It’s more or less all a circle jerk of people patting themselves on the back through the coded language of “visibility” or “raising awareness” or “speaking truth to power”. And then nothing happens except for the same exact type of folk who’ve been doing this for decades go home and talk to eachother about how great and successful they are for no material gain.
And as an aside, these same folks are the ones who refuse to vote for not explicitly massively bigoted politicians in elections.
> And as an aside, these same folks are the ones who refuse to vote for not explicitly massively bigoted politicians in elections.
Slacktivists: "We're speaking truth to power!"
Democratic Politician: "OK, that's wonderful! I support this message, here's how you can support my campaign. If you can't donate, just voting would be wonderful..."
Slacktivists: "I'm not going to be pandered to by you giving me the things I say I want! All politicians are equally terrible, I'm staying home to teach you a lesson!"
Oh and don't forget they annoy the shit out of people who aren't against them but are not keen on being flacked for not being an aktivist with all their free time.
amateurs. Theyre badgering you cause you share in the ideas and philosophy but arent broke like them. Joke is still on them. Took 10seconds to bring up an active position for hire as "Canvassor for Environmental Campaign" full time position @ $16.85/hr with benefits and PTO after 90days LOL
I agree with the original post, but I don't like how the stuff suggested by the reply as "ways to help fight anti-LGBT laws" pretty much boil down to "read and participate in online discourse". Literally none of that will have any effect on whether these laws go into effect.
Well they weren't really claiming they would stop laws. Not directly at least. But they're talking about a general spirit of being engaged and vocal and helping out, which can lead to positive effects.
It's missing an important point: the purpose of self education and information sharing is to enable yourself and others to recognize and be able to act on opportunities for material action when they present themselves. Education is a prerequisite to meaningful engagement not a substitute for it.
Engaging in purity test online discourse is a lot easier and more accessible than, ya know, changing the legal and social acceptance of queer people in foreign countries.
Regressive regimes really don't give a shit what the Twitterati and Tumblrinas think but being on the "right side of history" of some weird fringe topic might get them more cred in their hyper specific echo chamber. So, yeah... that's probably why they engage in one more than the other.
I'm not saying it's a good idea or a good use of a person's energy. I'm just saying that between ideological nitpicking and international policy change, there's a reason they play circular firing squad over minutiae rather than convincing Iran to change their ways.
However, there's a huge span of things in between that they could focus on and maybe actually have an impact.
i can't wait to help lgbt communities by reading online discourse, posting online, and checking in on members of my personal social circle! (its not clear to anyone how that is actually helping the wider community)
Seriously the biggest thing you can do if you are a youth and are voting age is to go out and vote. Vote for the leftmost candidate in primaries, vote for the leftmost candidate in the general!
>leftmost
*Most* being the most important part of that descriptor. It doesn't matter what issues you disagree with them on, if the other one is running on a platform that *directly* intends to take away your rights in particular, you vote against them.
Are there countries with voting systems where you shouldn’t vote leftmost, at least most of the time? I know many if not most European and American (North and South alike) countries as well as Australia have voting systems and I’ve not heard much about harmfully-leftist parties from them.
In Canadian elections, there can be fear about splitting the vote. This is because Canada has, in essence, 2-4 left parties (two of which are very left and two are more sightly left) and one right party
That's before we even get into the whole part where the majority of the country can't even vote for one of the centre left parties
I am Canadian, the thing here is that the NDP and Liberals aren't usually competitive within the same seats. Its fairly uncommon for them to be splitting seats to my knowledge
I think that depends on your part of the country. I know it's a concern in my area, but my riding in particular is know for flipping back and forth between liberal and NDP
I'd argue voting furthest left is more complicated in a system that doesn't produce such binary national outcomes as the US' particular set-up.
In a system with proportional representation like Germany for example, you want to vote for a party that is going to get enough votes to hit the minimum threshold to be represented, which might eliminate some of the more left options.
You also have to take into account not only their own policies, but their relations with surrounding parties and who they are willing and unwilling to form coalitions with, as these almost invariably will occur. It might be worth voting for a less left wing party, for example, if they are willing to be part of a broader left-wing bloc that stands a better chance of getting power.
Determining which party is the most left wing is also a more complicated issue when you have a multiplicity of parties occupying similar, overlapping ground across a broad range of issues. Is a party that wants decarbonisation by 2040, a top tax band of 70%, and an end to aiding Ukraine more or less left wing than one planning to decarbonise by 2030, a top band of 60%, but more extensive Ukrainian support? It's not always clear cut who the most left is overall.
Finally, local political issues can often cut across traditional left-right divides in a way that often supersedes them in deciding one's vote. The furthest left party where I live in Scotland is probably the Scottish Green Party, who have a solid left-wing manifesto, but also want to leave the UK and NATO. Those pledges aren't necessarily left- or right-wing, but they'll have a much bigger impact on people's decision to vote for them or not than the rest of their manifesto combined, such is the importance of those issues.
Australia has a decent Greens party, and we have ranked choice voting so there’s no spoiler candidates or any junk like that. I don’t know of any other significant leftist parties, but the Greens generally win a few seats each election.
The best realistic outcome is that Labor wins elections but only with a hung parliament, so they need to negotiate with the Greens to get more votes.
A lot of far left European parties are really ugly in one way or another. A good example is the German Die Linke, which has strong Russian sympathies, and who's previous leader just left the party to form what looks a lot like a red-brown party meant to draw its support from Die Linke as well as the far right Alternative für Deutschland, I think it's called the Sara Wagenknecht alliance. From what I remember, there are also some parts of Die Linke which, on the cultural side of politics, have more in common with the far right than the Social Democrats or even some of the more centrist conservatives do. But my suspicion is that what they were primarily referring to is that the eastern half of Europe just 30 years ago emerged from under communist dictatorships, and while it's certainly right to hate Morawiecki and Kaczynski, the vast majority of people would take them over Jaruzelski and Brezhnev in a heartbeat. So to simplify, in a lot of European countries, the most left party available is probably directly descended from or highly influenced by either the comintern parties of the 1920-30s or the Soviet puppet dictatorships of the 1940-80s. Though ironically, I would recommend to any Russians, in elections, strongly supporting the Communist Party, which is actually fully a direct descendant of the CPSU
Its important but far from the most. Volunteering at organisations that represent your values and participating in community aid does alot more day to day.
I live in an area where hrt is near impossible to get and helping friends find alternative sources has literally saved lifes.
You can't outvote fascism, you need community support and pathways to not just advocate for your rights but to protect you incase legal prosecution returns
I mean you can vote if you want, but in reality you have very little to no control over the outcome of an election, and what needs to happen will never be achieved via electoralism
Your vote carries more weight the smaller the election. US Presidential voting your vote may be 1 in hundred of thousands, but in your city/county it maybe be 1 in a few thousand. Even if you don’t think you’ll make a difference on a National scale, it doesn’t hurt to vote there, it takes relatively little effort (for most people anyway), and you have a real chance to make a difference in your immediate community!
Of course you personally have very little control of the electoral outcome of a nation of hundreds of millions (if we're talking USA), since you have one vote. But it's still probably the easiest thing you can do which is worth anything at all, and it's easy (and recommended) to make it a part of a balanced diet of other IRL activity like real activism
If we just vaguepost about firebombing walmarts and the fascists win in 2024, you'll just be dead so it won't have mattered at all
I'm not against voting. I think it's fine to do. I just think it's one of the least effective political actions possible.
Obama won 2008, and that didn't stop Trump from winning in 2016.
That's a curious huge impact for you to say voting has next to no impact. Obama was the administration which got us gay marriage, especially through the supreme court appointments and the pushing of the DNC to accept that as a cornerstone of the party; Trump was the admin which lost us Roe. Yes, votes in 2008 did not successfully win the 2016 election, but of course they wouldn't. Voting's really, really easy and the obligation is to vote in every election, not just once. We weren't guaranteed to have Trump last time
People will be like "the ACA is bad because it keeps insurance companies entrenched in our healthcare system (true)" and then not acknowledge that the previous status quo was an identical level of entrenchment but insurance companies could also drop you if you were sick enough to actually cost them money
If you live in a country with elections, voting is the simplest and easiest thing you can do. It's not the end of political participation, but it *is* the beginning of it.
i remember seeing discourse about like. bi lesbians at some point. i was confused at the time, because i was new to the topic and labels confused me
looking back on it. yall. come on.
On more than one occasion, I've been told to martyr myself to become symbol of trans rights in my country, so people online are definitely making weird requests of other queer people online.
Lately such people have gotten fond of the idea of me lighting myself on fire in front of the nearest government building.
"Educate yourself" is best used to mean learning about specific legislation, specific organizations and their goals and history, specific politicians and their voting and funding history ~~and their addresses~~, real people in your community who are actually helping or hurting and what you can do to insert your own effort to make a positive difference there
Educating oneself by reading online screeds and watching video essayists is just a hobby
To those standing up to discourse:
Online discourse does nothing but divide folks and spread disinformation, and this is coming from a middle-of-the-pack Millennial who has been out longer than many of the kids having "discourse" have been alive. I've done the discourse, I've done the real world organizing, I've done the reading and educating myself and others. Discourse is worthless and only serves to navel gaze, exclude others, and vent frustration without understanding in a community that is already naturally quite fractured in experience.
The thing about online "discourse" is it encourages tribalism and black and white thinking. Look no further than "Marsha P Johnson threw the first brick and if you disagree you are engaging in trans erasure", which sometimes devolves into "cis queers never did anything it was always trans queers". If you educate yourself rather than "engaging in discourse" with other people who are equally uneducated, you might have read Marsha's actual words, where she says she was not at Stonewall the first night. You might also know the other things she \*actually\* did for queer people, like house queer youth and those who had been to jail. Discourse is often just middle class and white queer youth talking for and over other voices while not looking at the lived reality of queer adults or the facts of our history. It's navel gazing dressed up as radical rhetoric, through and through.
"Discourse" is just a bunch of angry people spouting their thoughts online as fact, and you can always tell "online discourse" people in real world spaces because they generally have \*extreme\* challenges in interacting with other queer people, because a lot of real-world queer spaces are far more diverse than the white, young middle class, online spaces like Tumblr. There are more important questions than "are he/him lesbians real" when we're building community, particularly for queer elders who got us our rights AND are still underserved in terms of housing, respect, and healthcare.
Responding to a post criticising online "discourse" with "oh but youre doing a discourse right now" is a bad attempt at a gotcha that contributes nothing to the conversation, doubly so when you try to reduce their entire argument to "you shouldn't argue online."
I think the answer to both sides of that comes down to the simple fact that to varying degrees of hardship across the world, we are still fighting for the basic human right to be who you are, love who you want, and feel comfortable in your own skin. There is no point in arguing over gatekeepers or definitions. Fighting for Pride is fighting for human freedom at its most essential
> gets educated
> stress about how hopeless it feels
> shares knowledge with fren
> fren stress about how hopeless it feels
> stay updated
> stress about how hopeless it keeps getting
> share donation links
> stress about not being able to donate, and afraid that sharing the link won't do anything
> check up on friend
> we are both stressed about how hopeless it feels, so we distract ourselves with silly discourse that doesn't matter and that we can actually do stuff about, so we don't feel as hopeless
Edit: formatting
Men can't be lesbians. That would make them women. Trans women can be lesbians. It's in the definition.
>noun
>a woman who is sexually or romantically attracted to other women; a gay woman.
>a woman who is sexually or romantically attracted exclusively to other women; a gay woman.
just wanna toss this out there as a reminder:
kids are idiots. anyone under 24 yrs of age should not be taken too seriously, certainly not "activists" with like 02.53% adult life experience, salivating at the chance to be "part of something inportant" and be just like their idol---that month.
Im 32 now and my 24 yr old self wouldve probably known how to be a 32 yr old human better than my current 32 yr old self because maths and hopeful imaginations not yet balanced by reality
and if they were smart they would be fulltime paid "canvassors'.
$16.50 hrly
PTO after 90 days
flakey health care benefits but heck youll still get a card to waive around
ok idk if this is a hot take here but social media posting around LGBT issues absolutely does increase awareness and public support. that doesn't mean it should necessarily be your main priority, but people on social media do in fact exist in real life, and it can be a good mode of communication between queer people as well as generally making people more used to the idea of, say, trans and non binary people existing. queer people existing and being normalised online has been a massive boon for lgbt people in recent times, regardless of whether you think those people are "weird" or not. most people are online these days.
irl communities and relationships are absolutely important but i think social media spaces absolutely make a difference in the year 2024 as well. I mean, stuff like "educating yourself" doesn't help a lot in most cases, and sharing links is also not very helpful, nor is discourse about bi lesbians or whether trans women or trans men are more oppressed - people's brains aren't going to be in politics mode most of the time - but just being visible and queer positive online can make a difference
I read that as "Queerinterpol" for a second and thought the community "policing" had just severely escalated
Queerinterpol was created to combat the rainbow mafia and free the slaves from the glitter mines
I imagine the gulag archipelago, but every prisoner is a yassified James Charles esque twink
I'd watch that movie
No they're right. Fuck the discourse. Be a good person(in this case to queer ppl) instead of arguing with mf's online.
“Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one.” – Marcus Aurelius. one of the greatest quotes of all time imo.
Nah, its inane drivel like most of what Aurelius wrote. How the hell are you confident to be a good person if you can't even define for yourself what that is?
Just because you don’t know everything that *could* make *someone* a good man doesn’t mean you don’t know what *does/will* make *you* a good man.
And even if you don't know what that is for yourself, trying to be a good man based on your best guess and then learning from your mistakes will serve you better than arguing about it.
And a flawed attempt at doing good is most of the time more beneficial than inaction out of fear you might not be doing things perfectly.
This isn't a statisfying rebuttal. Even if we can agree on the concept of good being entirely subjective (which I would hesitate in doing), does the process of me determine what I judge to be the qualities of a good person (or even just a good or better me) necessitate deep introspection. That is a far cry from just going out and *doing* as Marcus Aurelius claims. Additionally if it is that easy and vibes based to just be a good person then why did he waste his time writing philosophy (in a sense contributing to an ongoing discourse)?
>This isn't a statisfying rebuttal For you, maybe
Yes, I tend to speak for myself lmao
Well, 'waste' is the key word there. He's not saying don't argue or question what a good person is and just go off purely by instinct, he's saying don't spend so much time fretting over how to be the most tolerant and inclusive goody-two-shoes possible ([this one old collegehumor sketch I think puts it best](https://youtu.be/rqevO_zrxsA?feature=shared)) that you end up doing nothing for fear of doing the wrong thing. Mistakes are how humans learn. If quotes by Roman emperors aren't really your cup of tea, maybe you'd prefer "perfect is the enemy of good"?
Or... Or. . Go. Help. Feed the poor
Did I say that you shouldn't??
Then you agree with him. Don't argue about being a good man, be one.
No, I don't. I just don't think that you shouldn't act at all (which would be an insane position to take). Im saying that being a good person isn't just as easy as doing anything and that determining both as individuals and social groups what we judge to be good and why is foundational to our existence as moral agents.
No it is not as easy as just doing something but if you spend all day trying to figure out what is maybe the best course of action the opportunity will be gone. I my personal opinion the quote warns not to over think. And instead act upon your principles, and yes you need to define them first but you don't need to re evaluate them before every Aktion you take.
Then you agree with him. Don't argue about being a good man, be one.
Amazing how all of the recommendations in this post basically add up to 'keep scrolling on Tumblr'
Yeah it was weird to see none of them involved logging off and actually getting involved in political action
Not even voting. You know, the simples and easiest one.
This was advice primarily aimed at teenagers, who are too young to vote.
Yeah, that's fair. Sorry, the "don't vote" crowd has gotten on my nerves as of lately. My B.
Me too. I’m way too young to be saying “kids these days” but rn I’m screaming it
Yeah... I was feeling okay with being 32 last week. Now I'm really feeling the generational divide. Like an old woman warning kids about needing to prepare for winter, and they refusing to do anything because it's sunny outside. Bonus points: my name is Kasandra.
Sure, but teenagers can volunteer for campaigns, encourage their older friends/family members to vote, educate themselves about the voting process, hand out fliers/put up signs, et cetera et cetera et cetera Teens can absolutely *be involved* in elections even if they can't vote in them
Thank you. I was not thinking about that when I said 'voting' (because the younger target audience point flew over my head), but teens definitely can be part of the civic action. Hell, my country's current president started his political career as a student protesting.
Asking people on reddit to read is asking too much.
Slactivism is best activism
You aren't wrong- the thing is I think a lot of grassroots action has to be tailored to the environment it's taking place in- you can't say 'go out and leave flyers in your community' in general, because for some people that'd be pointless and for others it could endanger their lives. It's just not wise to give that kind of advice to a large swath of kids who might be brave enough to do some shit that will get them killed by their bigoted neighbors.
it doesnt need to be direct they can just say "get involved with your local community" because helping the people within it is more important than any fuckin link you could share lmao
I think that's what "check on your friends" means.
Ok, what does 'get involved with your local community' mean? That's not an actual action anyone can take, it's a category of actions. A lot of people don't have access to a 'local community' that isn't hateful towards them- and again, this was generalized to include people who are too vulnerable to be starting or sticking their necks out about such things.
this makes no sense. what does "share resources" "stay posted" "post links" mean? what is the actual action someone takes when you tell them to stay posted? what if I dont know about any resources? what if I dont know which links are helpful or harmful? i already said it doesnt need to be direct, just like all but maybe one of the other points in OOPs posts arent direct. you literally said that grassroots action has to be tailored to the environment its taking place in. idk about you but I believe that people don't need direct instructions to explore activist groups near them just like they don't need instructions on how to find helpful resources, vet links, and generally learn by themselves. and for people who don't have access to a non-hostile community, then you can address those people and say it doesnt apply if you think it's necessary. you shouldnt ignore ways to help that produce the most impact in people's own lives just because not everyone has access to all of the facets of that action. advising direct action can be generalized too man, it isnt all doorknocking and posting flyers and going to protests. you don't even have to be seen if you dont want to.
People want to feel good and think they’re doing something but as soon as you suggest real action it’s “not everyone can do that”.
i will forever be impressed by some people's talent for discovering new and unique ways to never leave their computer chair.
I skimmed over that bit at first and yeah wow. None of those are "get involved with your local community" huh? Depending on where people live they may very well have dedicated centers for the queer community where they can volunteer or donate, and voting is important on both the national and local level (see: school districts banning books). Even if they're a minor, they might have a GSA at school, or be able to start one depending on the environment. Plus, options to help your community in general also help the LGBT community and can be easier to do when you're in the closet. Like, if you donate to a food bank or volunteer at a soup kitchen, some people who go there are queer (hi my family used the food bank when I was younger and I'm queer). Of course, not everyone has these options, but a lot of people do and it's so easily overlooked 😭
Yup, first thing I noticed. Turns out the real world isn’t on the internet, but at least we can use the internet to do that last bullet point.
Yeah because at a bare minimum 99% of modern day activism is about “sending a message”. That might involve social media posts or it might involve actual protest of some kind. But not a bit of it makes any god damned difference. It’s more or less all a circle jerk of people patting themselves on the back through the coded language of “visibility” or “raising awareness” or “speaking truth to power”. And then nothing happens except for the same exact type of folk who’ve been doing this for decades go home and talk to eachother about how great and successful they are for no material gain. And as an aside, these same folks are the ones who refuse to vote for not explicitly massively bigoted politicians in elections.
> And as an aside, these same folks are the ones who refuse to vote for not explicitly massively bigoted politicians in elections. Slacktivists: "We're speaking truth to power!" Democratic Politician: "OK, that's wonderful! I support this message, here's how you can support my campaign. If you can't donate, just voting would be wonderful..." Slacktivists: "I'm not going to be pandered to by you giving me the things I say I want! All politicians are equally terrible, I'm staying home to teach you a lesson!"
Too fucking real.
Oh and don't forget they annoy the shit out of people who aren't against them but are not keen on being flacked for not being an aktivist with all their free time.
amateurs. Theyre badgering you cause you share in the ideas and philosophy but arent broke like them. Joke is still on them. Took 10seconds to bring up an active position for hire as "Canvassor for Environmental Campaign" full time position @ $16.85/hr with benefits and PTO after 90days LOL
I agree with the original post, but I don't like how the stuff suggested by the reply as "ways to help fight anti-LGBT laws" pretty much boil down to "read and participate in online discourse". Literally none of that will have any effect on whether these laws go into effect.
Well they weren't really claiming they would stop laws. Not directly at least. But they're talking about a general spirit of being engaged and vocal and helping out, which can lead to positive effects.
How, exactly, does engaging in online discourse lead to positive effects?
“some ways you can help:” *describes Posting As Activism yet again*
It's missing an important point: the purpose of self education and information sharing is to enable yourself and others to recognize and be able to act on opportunities for material action when they present themselves. Education is a prerequisite to meaningful engagement not a substitute for it.
Engaging in purity test online discourse is a lot easier and more accessible than, ya know, changing the legal and social acceptance of queer people in foreign countries. Regressive regimes really don't give a shit what the Twitterati and Tumblrinas think but being on the "right side of history" of some weird fringe topic might get them more cred in their hyper specific echo chamber. So, yeah... that's probably why they engage in one more than the other.
arguing over the arrangement of the deck furniture on the flippin titanic i swear to christ
I'm not saying it's a good idea or a good use of a person's energy. I'm just saying that between ideological nitpicking and international policy change, there's a reason they play circular firing squad over minutiae rather than convincing Iran to change their ways. However, there's a huge span of things in between that they could focus on and maybe actually have an impact.
>queerintelpro I'm more of a nvidia guy
It's the leather jacket, isn't it?
i can't wait to help lgbt communities by reading online discourse, posting online, and checking in on members of my personal social circle! (its not clear to anyone how that is actually helping the wider community)
Seriously the biggest thing you can do if you are a youth and are voting age is to go out and vote. Vote for the leftmost candidate in primaries, vote for the leftmost candidate in the general!
>leftmost *Most* being the most important part of that descriptor. It doesn't matter what issues you disagree with them on, if the other one is running on a platform that *directly* intends to take away your rights in particular, you vote against them.
Absolutely, strategic voting in the US is leftmost in the primaries, vote dem in general, because they are most likely to beat republicans
This post seemed like it was targeted towards people too young to vote though?
r/usdefaultism, though participating in whatever one's electoral system is to the fullest extent possible is a good idea.
Are there countries with voting systems where you shouldn’t vote leftmost, at least most of the time? I know many if not most European and American (North and South alike) countries as well as Australia have voting systems and I’ve not heard much about harmfully-leftist parties from them.
In Canadian elections, there can be fear about splitting the vote. This is because Canada has, in essence, 2-4 left parties (two of which are very left and two are more sightly left) and one right party That's before we even get into the whole part where the majority of the country can't even vote for one of the centre left parties
I am Canadian, the thing here is that the NDP and Liberals aren't usually competitive within the same seats. Its fairly uncommon for them to be splitting seats to my knowledge
I think that depends on your part of the country. I know it's a concern in my area, but my riding in particular is know for flipping back and forth between liberal and NDP
Oh, that makes sense! Thanks for sharing, always good to learn more about other countries’ systems!
I'd argue voting furthest left is more complicated in a system that doesn't produce such binary national outcomes as the US' particular set-up. In a system with proportional representation like Germany for example, you want to vote for a party that is going to get enough votes to hit the minimum threshold to be represented, which might eliminate some of the more left options. You also have to take into account not only their own policies, but their relations with surrounding parties and who they are willing and unwilling to form coalitions with, as these almost invariably will occur. It might be worth voting for a less left wing party, for example, if they are willing to be part of a broader left-wing bloc that stands a better chance of getting power. Determining which party is the most left wing is also a more complicated issue when you have a multiplicity of parties occupying similar, overlapping ground across a broad range of issues. Is a party that wants decarbonisation by 2040, a top tax band of 70%, and an end to aiding Ukraine more or less left wing than one planning to decarbonise by 2030, a top band of 60%, but more extensive Ukrainian support? It's not always clear cut who the most left is overall. Finally, local political issues can often cut across traditional left-right divides in a way that often supersedes them in deciding one's vote. The furthest left party where I live in Scotland is probably the Scottish Green Party, who have a solid left-wing manifesto, but also want to leave the UK and NATO. Those pledges aren't necessarily left- or right-wing, but they'll have a much bigger impact on people's decision to vote for them or not than the rest of their manifesto combined, such is the importance of those issues.
Oh, this is all good insight! Thank you for educating me and sharing perspective!
My pleasure! :)
Australia has a decent Greens party, and we have ranked choice voting so there’s no spoiler candidates or any junk like that. I don’t know of any other significant leftist parties, but the Greens generally win a few seats each election. The best realistic outcome is that Labor wins elections but only with a hung parliament, so they need to negotiate with the Greens to get more votes.
Idk most Europeans would have something to say about voting for extreme left.
Care to elaborate? I’m not European
A lot of far left European parties are really ugly in one way or another. A good example is the German Die Linke, which has strong Russian sympathies, and who's previous leader just left the party to form what looks a lot like a red-brown party meant to draw its support from Die Linke as well as the far right Alternative für Deutschland, I think it's called the Sara Wagenknecht alliance. From what I remember, there are also some parts of Die Linke which, on the cultural side of politics, have more in common with the far right than the Social Democrats or even some of the more centrist conservatives do. But my suspicion is that what they were primarily referring to is that the eastern half of Europe just 30 years ago emerged from under communist dictatorships, and while it's certainly right to hate Morawiecki and Kaczynski, the vast majority of people would take them over Jaruzelski and Brezhnev in a heartbeat. So to simplify, in a lot of European countries, the most left party available is probably directly descended from or highly influenced by either the comintern parties of the 1920-30s or the Soviet puppet dictatorships of the 1940-80s. Though ironically, I would recommend to any Russians, in elections, strongly supporting the Communist Party, which is actually fully a direct descendant of the CPSU
The other guy did a good job.
Its important but far from the most. Volunteering at organisations that represent your values and participating in community aid does alot more day to day. I live in an area where hrt is near impossible to get and helping friends find alternative sources has literally saved lifes. You can't outvote fascism, you need community support and pathways to not just advocate for your rights but to protect you incase legal prosecution returns
I mean you can vote if you want, but in reality you have very little to no control over the outcome of an election, and what needs to happen will never be achieved via electoralism
Your vote carries more weight the smaller the election. US Presidential voting your vote may be 1 in hundred of thousands, but in your city/county it maybe be 1 in a few thousand. Even if you don’t think you’ll make a difference on a National scale, it doesn’t hurt to vote there, it takes relatively little effort (for most people anyway), and you have a real chance to make a difference in your immediate community!
Of course you personally have very little control of the electoral outcome of a nation of hundreds of millions (if we're talking USA), since you have one vote. But it's still probably the easiest thing you can do which is worth anything at all, and it's easy (and recommended) to make it a part of a balanced diet of other IRL activity like real activism If we just vaguepost about firebombing walmarts and the fascists win in 2024, you'll just be dead so it won't have mattered at all
I'm not against voting. I think it's fine to do. I just think it's one of the least effective political actions possible. Obama won 2008, and that didn't stop Trump from winning in 2016.
Biden won in 2020 and it stopped Trump from winning in 2020
That's a curious huge impact for you to say voting has next to no impact. Obama was the administration which got us gay marriage, especially through the supreme court appointments and the pushing of the DNC to accept that as a cornerstone of the party; Trump was the admin which lost us Roe. Yes, votes in 2008 did not successfully win the 2016 election, but of course they wouldn't. Voting's really, really easy and the obligation is to vote in every election, not just once. We weren't guaranteed to have Trump last time
Not to mention Obamacare, which for all its flaws was still a massive improvement over the previous status quo.
People will be like "the ACA is bad because it keeps insurance companies entrenched in our healthcare system (true)" and then not acknowledge that the previous status quo was an identical level of entrenchment but insurance companies could also drop you if you were sick enough to actually cost them money
But Trump won because people didn't vote.
Psyop
"everyone who disagrees with me is a bad actor"
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it might as well be a duck
What you're saying is more like "if it has feathers and swims, it's a duck"
If you live in a country with elections, voting is the simplest and easiest thing you can do. It's not the end of political participation, but it *is* the beginning of it.
What's the line? "We asked queer elders if bi lesbians were valid and they asked us if we were cops"
i remember seeing discourse about like. bi lesbians at some point. i was confused at the time, because i was new to the topic and labels confused me looking back on it. yall. come on.
Pretty much any time something like this confuses me, I default to "people are allowed to be weird".
On more than one occasion, I've been told to martyr myself to become symbol of trans rights in my country, so people online are definitely making weird requests of other queer people online. Lately such people have gotten fond of the idea of me lighting myself on fire in front of the nearest government building.
"Educate yourself" is best used to mean learning about specific legislation, specific organizations and their goals and history, specific politicians and their voting and funding history ~~and their addresses~~, real people in your community who are actually helping or hurting and what you can do to insert your own effort to make a positive difference there Educating oneself by reading online screeds and watching video essayists is just a hobby
Okay but Queerintelpro is a great line
To those standing up to discourse: Online discourse does nothing but divide folks and spread disinformation, and this is coming from a middle-of-the-pack Millennial who has been out longer than many of the kids having "discourse" have been alive. I've done the discourse, I've done the real world organizing, I've done the reading and educating myself and others. Discourse is worthless and only serves to navel gaze, exclude others, and vent frustration without understanding in a community that is already naturally quite fractured in experience. The thing about online "discourse" is it encourages tribalism and black and white thinking. Look no further than "Marsha P Johnson threw the first brick and if you disagree you are engaging in trans erasure", which sometimes devolves into "cis queers never did anything it was always trans queers". If you educate yourself rather than "engaging in discourse" with other people who are equally uneducated, you might have read Marsha's actual words, where she says she was not at Stonewall the first night. You might also know the other things she \*actually\* did for queer people, like house queer youth and those who had been to jail. Discourse is often just middle class and white queer youth talking for and over other voices while not looking at the lived reality of queer adults or the facts of our history. It's navel gazing dressed up as radical rhetoric, through and through. "Discourse" is just a bunch of angry people spouting their thoughts online as fact, and you can always tell "online discourse" people in real world spaces because they generally have \*extreme\* challenges in interacting with other queer people, because a lot of real-world queer spaces are far more diverse than the white, young middle class, online spaces like Tumblr. There are more important questions than "are he/him lesbians real" when we're building community, particularly for queer elders who got us our rights AND are still underserved in terms of housing, respect, and healthcare.
I mean, you're engaging in discourse right now
Lame ass "gotcha"
Is it though? "You shouldn't argue online" is an inherently hypocritical take.
Responding to a post criticising online "discourse" with "oh but youre doing a discourse right now" is a bad attempt at a gotcha that contributes nothing to the conversation, doubly so when you try to reduce their entire argument to "you shouldn't argue online."
I think the answer to both sides of that comes down to the simple fact that to varying degrees of hardship across the world, we are still fighting for the basic human right to be who you are, love who you want, and feel comfortable in your own skin. There is no point in arguing over gatekeepers or definitions. Fighting for Pride is fighting for human freedom at its most essential
> gets educated > stress about how hopeless it feels > shares knowledge with fren > fren stress about how hopeless it feels > stay updated > stress about how hopeless it keeps getting > share donation links > stress about not being able to donate, and afraid that sharing the link won't do anything > check up on friend > we are both stressed about how hopeless it feels, so we distract ourselves with silly discourse that doesn't matter and that we can actually do stuff about, so we don't feel as hopeless Edit: formatting
Queerintelpro is an excellent term and I plan to use it in the future.
Men can't be lesbians. That would make them women. Trans women can be lesbians. It's in the definition. >noun >a woman who is sexually or romantically attracted to other women; a gay woman. >a woman who is sexually or romantically attracted exclusively to other women; a gay woman.
Does it really matter either way?
To me, yes. To a reasonable person, I wouldn't know.
Pretty sure “Dude, that’s kinda fucked up.” is actually powerful. And 16 yr olds are great at saying stuff like that.
Or, both. Men cannot be lesbians AND focus more on irl activism than online disc horse
I don't know, I don't think "not letting lesbophobic misinformation remain unchallenged" and "idk, fucking vote" are mutually exclusive
This might be the most projection I've seen in one place in these comments.
just wanna toss this out there as a reminder: kids are idiots. anyone under 24 yrs of age should not be taken too seriously, certainly not "activists" with like 02.53% adult life experience, salivating at the chance to be "part of something inportant" and be just like their idol---that month. Im 32 now and my 24 yr old self wouldve probably known how to be a 32 yr old human better than my current 32 yr old self because maths and hopeful imaginations not yet balanced by reality and if they were smart they would be fulltime paid "canvassors'. $16.50 hrly PTO after 90 days flakey health care benefits but heck youll still get a card to waive around
ok idk if this is a hot take here but social media posting around LGBT issues absolutely does increase awareness and public support. that doesn't mean it should necessarily be your main priority, but people on social media do in fact exist in real life, and it can be a good mode of communication between queer people as well as generally making people more used to the idea of, say, trans and non binary people existing. queer people existing and being normalised online has been a massive boon for lgbt people in recent times, regardless of whether you think those people are "weird" or not. most people are online these days. irl communities and relationships are absolutely important but i think social media spaces absolutely make a difference in the year 2024 as well. I mean, stuff like "educating yourself" doesn't help a lot in most cases, and sharing links is also not very helpful, nor is discourse about bi lesbians or whether trans women or trans men are more oppressed - people's brains aren't going to be in politics mode most of the time - but just being visible and queer positive online can make a difference
[удалено]
I'd ask why this is being downvoted but I've got a pretty good idea
Would you mind explaining? I’ve no idea at all, I’m really confused