I hate conservative ideology but I’m not cool with dehumanizing them in this fashion. That’s literally the words of fascism. Jews were referred to as cockroaches in Germany in the 1930s.
Your enemy has already dehumanized you. They are fascists. You’re offering them far more sympathy and compassion than they would ever give you, and they would gladly use your sympathy against you given any opportunity.
Your “betterness” is only seen by conservatives as weakness to exploit. As we move into an era of much more deadly consequences, your position of “being better” is dangerous to you and those around you.
Then let them think we’re weak. Dehumanizing others goes against my principles, whether or not that person dehumanizes me. I won’t compromise myself to “best” them because doing so would defeat the purpose.
Refusing to dehumanize them doesn’t make us any more exploitable, and I would argue refusal to dehumanize others solidifies trust on the side of those with humanity left.
When I see someone refuse to sink to such low states as calling other humans “cockroaches” i have more respect for them, and that much more faith trust they won’t turn around and call me a cockroach a few years down the line when political tides change.
If you’re out here calling people cockroaches then I really don’t give a fuck what you have to say. Bad faith, emotional based insults get us nowhere. They give us too much ammo to be that lazy.
Humanizing an enemy who will not return the sentiment is how kind, empathetic people are led to their deaths. Withholding emotions for an enemy (who is incapable of empathy and who delights in your suffering) helps to eliminate emotional conflicts when hesitation will result in loss.
On the topic of emotional responses: Your emotional response to my withholding of empathy for the enemy leads me to distrust your ability to do what is needed when the time comes. I argue that the “emotional response” in this argument has been yours alone.
In any other situation, where an existential life and death conflict was not at hand, I would agree with you. When prepping for war, however, I must insist on not being empathetic with my enemy.
My response wasn’t particularly emotional but sure.
Keeping my empathy doesn’t preclude me from being discerning, swift and decisive in moments of crisis or high risk. I prefer to be kind, that doesn’t mean I don’t know how to be vicious.
When “prepping for war”, it’s important to consider the non-actors that may get caught in the crossfire. “Conservatives” is a wide generalization, many of them are not only capable of empathy, but dare I say decent people, even if they’re under the spell of propaganda.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a trans woman with a gun and a plan for if/when crisis hits. I’m very aware of the current threats to my life and continued pursuit of happiness. But before that I’m human, and so are they. And as far as I can tell, most of them are as unwilling to participate in this propaganda driven culture war as I am.
It’s interesting to me that I only ever hear men complaining about this issue. That might not be reality, but from what I’ve seen, men are using “protect our women” as a reason for this hateful legislation when most of the women they are “protecting” don’t really care.
It’s because there’s fewer women crazies in power on the right. The ones that have been elected say this kinda hateful rhetoric anytime trans people are brought up to, but most of them aren’t elected because Republicans hate women too.
Ok, so what if dad brings his 3-year-old daughter into the men’s room, or mom brings her infant son into the ladies room? Can I sue over the emotional trauma that caused me?
People are starving and unhoused and that’s exactly why they’re focusing on this. To distract people from the source of their actual issues. Bread and circuses.
The people sliding the checks under the table to the politicians pounding this worthless wardrum day and night are the same people who profit greatly on the idea that there are people who have, and people who have not. As long as this dichotomy is preserved at all costs, the system remains stable and the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor where they belong: supporting the wealthy with their low-wage labor, and the vast, complicated spectrum in between.
Trans people became the latest convenient target because they’re such small segment of the population. They’re being singled out exactly because they’re easier targets than a racial or ethnic minority. Not that they’ve stopped pointing at ethnic and racial minorities, but they know that more people will push back a lot harder on overtly stated ideas of racial superiority.
No no, I don’t intend to besmirch circuses. It’s a phrase attributed to a second century AD Roman poet, referring to politicians generating public approval by providing diversion instead of fixing the root causes of issues or even handling those issues at all.
Ironically, most circus performers tend to be very liberal. The circus sideshow is home to all the outcasts, and a large chunk of us are trans or queer. Many of us are disabled, some of us have deformities or body mods (I have a forked tongue). Republicans would undoubtedly send us to the gallows if they could.
I’ve literally gone on stage to warn people about the bills that Republicans are trying to pass. At our core, we’re artists, and we’re trying to fight the good fight.
In fact, the history of the “freak show” is very interesting and worth reading about. It’s a story of how capitalism exploits vulnerable populations for profit (PT Barnum is a piece of shit), though it has evolved a lot over time and is different now.
In fact, the history of the “freak show” is very interesting and worth reading about. It’s a story of how capitalism exploits vulnerable populations for profit (PT Barnum is a piece of shit), though it has evolved a lot over time and is different now.
Does this also affect any private establishment that wants to have a non-gendered bathroom? Like can those businesses sue the government for overreach for putting an onerous burden on their business for needing more than one bathroom?
Oh, awesome! Cause that’s what I need when I’m struggling. I don’t need health care. I don’t need a livable wage. I don’t need equal rights. I need to sue trans people.
See? Repubs are giving us a path to success. Just sue a trans person who maybe has no money to pay out and everything is fine!
Nina Simone sang it about the black experience in Mississippi in the 1960s. With a couple of minor lyrics changes, it could be about the queer experience today.
I was talking to my therapist yesterday about this, before this news dropped. How I couldn’t wait to get my new ID card with an F on it so that I could finally go to the bathroom without too much fear. If someone happened to spot that maybe I was trans, I could just put it out and say “look, I’m a woman” and walk away.
But she was in disbelief at this. She genuinely couldn’t wrap her head around the idea of someone making a scene because a trans person was in their bathroom. Like, at first, she thought I was blowing up a non existent issue. “Who would do this?!”, she asked, And I told her it was an actual issue that lots of people were doing it and therefore lots of trans people avoided the bathroom like the plague.
And when I told her about some US states new laws, taking Utah as an example, her jaw dropped. She had this look of utter disappointment, like I had just chipped away a piece of her faith in humanity.
Not only did the idea never crossed her mind, she couldn’t even conceive why it would be a problem. I laughed at this and told her: “That’s because you’re a normal person.”
Just wanted to share this with all of you, especially fellow trans people. It’s good to know that while some people are mentally deranged at the idea of my existence, It not only seems to be a very loud minority, but it also seems to be a repellent for a lot of people who cannot grasp their obsessions.
Seeing someone who isn’t really aware of our issues in the first place being shocked at these things was relieving. It felt good and gave me hope.
Even though I rationally understand it, I still have a hard time wrapping my head around it. Let someone shit in peace. If I’m in the men’s room and someone comes in there that looks like a woman dressed as a man, I couldn’t care less.
In fact, if someone came into the men’s room and looked like Marylin Monroe in the famous white dress, I couldn’t care less.
Piss, shit, whatever.
Just don’t talk to me. I’m not in there to make friends.
They like to bring up the “a man could wear a dress and go into the women’s room and rape a little girl” canard. To which I reply, “they’d probably get away with that more easily if they wore a janitor’s uniform. We really should ban janitors from bathrooms.”
I may be pulling something out of my ass but I honestly can’t be bothered to check. But, wasn’t this something that was said about lesbian women too? That they shouldn’t be allowed in women’s bathroom because they would pry on other women and so on?
There’s three acceptable forms of communication in the restroom: functional (eg after you), quick compliments on outfit/makeup (some dislike it but it grew on me), and the far too drunk lady who speaks the wisdom she cannot possess
Whenever I walk into a public restroom, I whip out my portable lab equipment and forcibly karyotype everyone there. How else am I supposed to piss for 20 seconds in peace?
The entire point is to make their existence illegal. Then no matter what they do you can charge them with the excuse of “they shouldn’t have broken the law.”