Skip to main content
Again someone (@Homebrewandhacking) demonstrated that "transphobe" means a person who do not comply with the demands of a person who is (I guess?) trans.
I am sure there are blondophobes, smallnosophobes and blueshirtophobes as well, when people (with any random attribute) feel like they have the right to command the world to bend at their will, and they point at their random attribute and scream some *phobe to show they are actually the victims of injustice.
@PJ Coffey
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
What exactly are your views on trans people? They are alleging you have transphobic views but I have yet to see sufficient evidence either way to make this claim.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal My views? I support minority people, protect them in online communities, speak for them when it's needed, honour their requests and some of my friends are in minority groups. This includes but not limited to gender categories (gays, lesbians; I do not personally know trans people but I have absolutely no problem with them, in fact that's the point: I do not have to KNOW that they are LMBTQ+, they are people like any of us).
@Harry Hall
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal ...I am Hungarian, so my views are also against the governmental hate propaganda against LMBTQ+ people.

However! _Generally_ I strongly dislike zealots, regardless of their actual agenda. I fight for LMBTQ people to have no less rights than anyone, AND fight against giving them more rights than anyone, too. (Same goes for any topic, leftists, rightwings, feminists, male supremacists, whatever.)
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
Right wing and male supremacists (Sexists? Incels?) are the ones trying to deny other people's rights. Do you know what the paradox of tolerance is?

Fyi: Gay and lesbians aren't considered a gender issue. It's also LGBTQ+, I am not sure where you found the version of the acronym you used. LGBTQIA+ is also used by some people.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal I do not know universal truth but I do know that, for me, tolerance does not include forcing other people to do what others want. For me tolerance means everyone is free to live their lives as long as they do not risk mine.

People telling me how to speak or think (instead of ASKING) justified by _their_ liberty are no different from anyone else denying human rights. People are free to think bad of me but they are not free to echo it.

It's complex, I know.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
Paradox of tolerance means you can't allow people to act on or express views that are intolerant. For example a significant part of right wing communities aren't tolerant of black people, immigrants, queer people, etc. They want to restrict the rights of other people. In a tolerant society you aren't allowed to act or in many cases even speak about these views (see hate speech laws).

A society that tolerates intolerance will risk falling to intolerant people/views.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal Then it is a false truth, as someone would entitle themselves to decide wat is considered to be intolerant. These people will restrict the rights of the people they call "intolerant". It is also the source of lot of false speech, when people think forbiding words make their meaning disappear. Instead, other words will be used, and more and more have to be forbidden in the name of "tolerance".
@Harry Hall
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal As I said, tolerance means for me letting people live their lives fully, which does not exclude fight against people trying to restrict other people's lives, please do not imply that. I meant it in the most general sense: ensuring that most people would and could live their lives as freely as possible within a working society.
It DOES NOT mean that people can enforce their point of views on others. Tolerance goes both ways, with patience and empathy.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
You don't understand how freedom actually works irl. Absolute freedom is physically impossible as we are all bound by the laws of physics and maths. Furthermore unlimited freedom aside from those laws is still impossible for more than one person or entity at a time because people have always oppressed other people. It's a sad fact that freedom requires laws and restrictions or else it is extremely unequal.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal When you say "you don't understand" then you make a statement about something you're completely ignorant about.
You read what I write, imagine about the same amount, try to amalgamate them and respond to that. What you say is not what I said.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
I apologize if I misunderstood what you have said.

It's also very clear that you have misunderstood some of my other comments. You have espoused support for the idea of restricting hate speech while saying you don't support the paradox of tolerance - which is why the concept of restrictions on hate speech comes from.

I started this discussion by supporting your position. Let us not argue about things we in fact agree upon. That would be most unwise.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal My general feeling was that we agree about everything, but have lot of problems by the specific meaning and interpretation of various words.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
I think you may have hit the nail on the head with this statement.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal I often do mentoring on Wikipedia and elsewhere, and I listen to everyone and try to be as impartial as possible. It usually includes one or both parties calling me "XXXphobe" where XXX is their group membership or agenda class, because I do not accept their point of view and support the other side, while in fact I supporth them both and force them both to accept the other side being different, often VERY different.
Source of lof of hate towards me. 😁
@Harry Hall
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal ....and I really cannot fit into 500 characters. 🤣
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
This makes some sense. I think perhaps some people don't want to see the other side of an argument be recorded in an impartial manner because they think it lends them some legitimacy. The human race is unfortunately in a very sorry state of affairs.

Unfortunately both right and left wing are responsible for this in some ways. Right wing either creates a problem or refuses to see one exists. Left wing complains without having a solution or invents a solution that is worse than the problem.
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
Empathy can help cause discrimination. It's one of the foundations of in-group and out-group thinking as people inherently have more empathy for their in-group - you could say they find them more sympathetic. The fact that empathy is selective for most people is a large problem.

Unfortunately I don't have any solution for this. I am not sure removing empathy is any better of a solution. Perhaps having less disgust could help?
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal It would require large amounts of energy spent on patience and understanding, of which most people think it's a waste. Many of them _demand_ tolerance in an extremely intolerant way.
I do not have the solution for them.
Mine is patience, listening, and smiling when they call me names before banning, thinking that a problem they have will go away by shutting down other voices.
And I assert my views, indeed. Maybe often impolite way. They are always free not to listen.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
Yes people do change terminology to avoid detection, some call these terms of obfuscation dog whistles. Under cover operatives is one way to deal with this exact problem. It's an intelligence problem.

The rest of this argument is absurd though. Would you just have Nazis roam the streets and radicalize people? This isn't hyperbole, it actually happens in both America and England. Hate speech laws exist for a reason.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal No, and I did not say that either.
But consider the case when a black guy (some actor I think?) was fired because he said "black guys" about black guys. I mean, he IS black, why couldn't he call HIMSELF whatever he please? That's the problem with using generalised labels like "hate speech".
I agree that "real" hate speech shall be controlled or banished, but this went on way too far now.

I say I don't like someone and they want me to go to jail, hate spch
@Harry Hall
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal also please note that I cannot expand my rather complex opinions in a few hundred characters.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
Neither if these examples is legally hate speech though. You've also just told me you fundamentally agree with the concept that the paradox of tolerance embodies. You're real argument is about the current implementation of that concept.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal Yes, I know and agree that completely free acting is impossible, that's why I try to phrase it, in this extremely compressed form, that "as possible", "within societal limits".
My argument is not just implementation, but interpretation, yes.

Think about it: people are killing each other because someone call a WORD(!!) slur, while they don't. That's that, inverse hate speech??
@Harry Hall
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal re: LGBTQ and like: I usually use simply "gays" or "homosexuals" or "non-binary" (if I do at all). I cannot follow all the US slang and PC speech and various acronyms getting longer and longer every day.
I try to honour the request of people here around how to call them but I simply cannot memorise all the specific wishes. Tell me a good word to use for non-binary people and I'll use it, if it's possible to memorise without great efforts.
@Harry Hall
Harry Hall
Harry Hall  
•
I never mentioned non-binary people. Is there a reason you have brought them up specifically? Normally they come under trans.

From what I have seen LMBT is the acronym used in a different language so I am guessing that's where you got it from.

Also p.s. I am not an American. I use the same acronym because all English speaking countries seem to use that one, or at least England does. It's funny how Americans get credited for anything an English speaking country coins.
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal Please do not expect me to know all the details and terminology about "non cis people". I repeat: I do not care about people's sex life, genes, religion, political side and like, and I prefer them as humans. It is not a problem when they occasionally bring up the topic, anyone does, but keeping it as the only topic, always is unacceptable for me, I am not interested. I dislike anyone forcing me to listen to it, or bring it up every time. Counterproductive.
@Harry Hall
grin
grin  
•
@areyouevenreal I have found why I wrote LMBT[Q][+]!!! 😀

It is the #Hungarian translation of LGBTQ (Leszbikusok-Melegek-Biszex-Trans, and later the Queer, which has no local name, was attached, then the plus sign).

So you were completely right!
#Hungarian @Harry Hall
⇧