zlacker

[return to "The Origins of Wokeness"]
1. Pfhort+Wg5[view] [source] 2025-01-14 19:34:25
>>crbela+(OP)
> You can express your own religious identity and explain your beliefs, but you can't call your coworkers infidels if they disagree, or try to ban them from saying things that contradict its doctrines, or insist that the organization adopt yours as its official religion.

The issue with this is that it enshrines denial of identity in the same place as religion. If a trans colleague identifies a way that you disagree with, does this give you free pass to misgender them and deny their identity? That is cruel, and you would be denying a colleague their right of self-determination. This is bullying.

I'm not saying you should be stricken down for needing time to adjust to their pronouns and chosen name; I'm saying you shouldn't be cruel to them by denying them their identity, and that such cruel behavior should not be protected in society.

---

I would turn this entire discourse about "wokeness" on its head, especially the discourse from the pg's and Musk's of the world, and assert that they don't actually care about the way the ideological wind is blowing; They're afraid of the collectivist nature of it.

That many less-powerful people can band together in pursuit of social justice against them, entrenched titans of capital, those capable of steering mainstream discourse, can provide a counter-argument to their power structures, is what _really_ troubles them.

◧◩
2. susema+3j5[view] [source] 2025-01-14 19:42:04
>>Pfhort+Wg5
> If a trans colleague identifies a way that you disagree with, does this give you free pass to misgender them and deny their identity?

Yes, of course. If you believe that false claims of an opposite-sex identity constitute a harmful lie, why should you be compelled to endorse it?

◧◩◪
3. Pfhort+ip5[view] [source] 2025-01-14 20:07:49
>>susema+3j5
> Yes, of course. If you believe that false claims of an opposite-sex identity constitute a harmful lie, why should you be compelled to endorse it?

Because such behavior is a direct and targeted attack on an individual or individuals, not the concept of gender identity, transness, etc.

◧◩◪◨
4. susema+pt5[view] [source] 2025-01-14 20:25:58
>>Pfhort+ip5
If you believe that making false claims of an opposite-sex identity is a harmful lie, then being compelled under threat of punishment to, for example, refer to a male as "she", is also a direct and targeted attack.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. Pfhort+aK5[view] [source] 2025-01-14 21:50:30
>>susema+pt5
Being trans is identity, but being transphobic is ideology. Being a transphobe does not alter your identity in any way, nor change how you are referred to in society. Denying someone their identity and disrespecting someone in a professional setting is toxic and hostile.

If you want to be an asshole at home, you're free to do so insofar that it is legal. But if you want to be an asshole at work, that should not be enshrined in the same way as religious belief as pg suggests.

Unless you think it should be allowed, but what level of assholery is allowed? Is assholery against trans people the only assholery allowed? Is it okay to be an asshole to disabled people too? To women? To someone of a different color?

[go to top]