Current Events > bOTh SIdeS

(+) Yeah! (+)

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

I dunno why this is so frowned upon, and the only answer anyone seems to have for this question is just to repeat "both sides."

What is the "this" that's frowned upon? What question are you talking about?

lolife67 posted...

Exactly! There's no middle ground between those that want true equality/equity and those that don't. Thinking there is comes off as incredibly stupid.

So whats the solution?

STEROLIZER posted...

So whats the solution?

Not sure. But kicking the ball further down the field certainly isn't it. All that does is preserve an imperfect system that only continues to harm marginalized groups.

If it were me, I say we draw a line in the sand and stop trying to act like the other side actually has any merit. There's absolutely no point in trying to negotiate with them. We continue to call them out for exactly what they are.

STEROLIZER posted...

LOL, Im watch this movie on Netflix right now and this scene literally just popped on as I was browsing this topic

https://youtu.be/3XM1NVWLT30?si=iLC0zrB4VeGLt21w

I like how he never challenges his views.
"So you support a party that wants to remove rights from the LGBT"
"You can't ask that!"

STEROLIZER posted...

You still need to talk even after the war is over, or else stuff isnt going to take.

Nope. We out number them by a lot. Every year we out number them by even more. They have to change or be changed. Repubs can't attract young voters because they have nothing to offer so instead they despratly try to restrict thier voting, that won't work forever.

We do not need them.

lolife67 posted...

Not sure. But kicking the ball further down the field certainly isn't it. All that does is preserve an imperfect system that only continues to harm marginalized groups.

If it were me, I say we draw a line in the sand and stop trying to act like the other side actually has any merit. There's absolutely no point in trying to negotiate with them. We continue to call them out for exactly what they are.

But then how do you keep them out of power? We have elections and we have to win the vote. But if draw the line and refuse to let them cross over, but the other side doesnt comply and they start working to encourage people hop over the line

When it comes to Israel-Palastine it literally is both-sides.

STEROLIZER posted...

So whats the solution?

To side with the people that want equality

havean776 posted...

Nope. We out number them by a lot. Every year we out number them by even more. They have to change or be changed. Repubs can't attract young voters because they have nothing to offer so instead they despratly try to restrict thier voting, that won't work forever.

We do not need them.

So the goal is to just age them out, and encourage younger voters to vote?

Are there any studies done regarding the children of republican families voting democract when they advance into voting age?

I am generally curious. Because that would mean social media is influencing the younger generation in spite of their environment.

I use to argue this (in person, never online) back before Trump took office. But once he did I kind of let it die out.

Tyranthraxus posted...

To side with the people that want equality

But how do you convince the folks currently sided against it to suddenly make that change and jump over the line?

We ignore them? Just hope the younger generation advancing into voting age gives democracts the numbers necessary to not have to worry about swing voters?

STEROLIZER posted...

But then how do you keep them out of power? We have elections and we have to win the vote. But if draw the line and refuse to let them cross over, but the other side doesnt comply and they start working to encourage people hop over the line

Who said they can't cross over? Nobody's blocking that except for themselves. And if others decide to side with them then screw them too. Why do you so desperately want to be friends with someone who wouldn't spit on you if you were on fire?

EPR-radar posted...

Regarding the US civil war in particular, the main problem is that after the war, there was way too much meaningless talk, and way too little actual reconstruction. In fact, the Union won the war and lost the peace.

That loss was because too few in the rest of the country had the stomach to do what would have been necessary to prevent resentful ex-Confederates from instituting Jim Crow after the end of military occupation.

Jefferson Davis and his cabinet were not hanged or imprisoned for being part of a rebellion. Republicans should face ballot removal for supporting an insurrection but Trump and allies faced no recorse.

STEROLIZER posted...

But how do you convince the folks currently sided against it to suddenly make that change and jump over the line?

We ignore them? Just hope the younger generation advancing into voting age gives democracts the numbers necessary to not have to worry about swing voters?

You are aware that every generation is more progressive than the previous one, right? Time and history are on our side, so you're "fears" are unfounded and, again, show you really don't know what you're talking about.

name_unknown posted...

Jefferson Davis and his cabinet were not hanged or imprisoned for being part of a rebellion. Republicans should face ballot removal for supporting an insurrection but Trump and allies faced no recorse.

Right! We could try actually holding them accountable with a zero tolerance policy but the issue is that Democrats, as a whole, aren't really progressive. They're just moreso than Republicans but still have shared personal interests in maintaining the status quo.

lolife67 posted...

What is the "this" that's frowned upon? What question are you talking about?

The topic title, of course.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

The topic title, of course.

That's not a question.

lolife67 posted...

Who said they can't cross over? Nobody's blocking that except for themselves. And if others decide to side with them then screw them too. Why do you so desperately want to be friends with someone who wouldn't spit on you if you were on fire?

I think we should actively campaign to try and get them to swing over. That involves being able to put the shoe on the other foot sotospeak, and try to understand their side of the issue. Thats the dialogue we need, and thats where the nuance lies. Figure out the nuance, and swing them over.

lolife67 posted...

You are aware that every generation is more progressive than the previous one, right?

I certainly use to believe that. Then Trump took office.

Time and history are on our side, so you're "fears" are unfounded and, again, show you really don't know what you're talking about.

It might be on our side. Thats true, but like, Im not really willing to let them take office again in the meantime. It makes sense just to try and appeal to those swing voters and attempt to dent their political power by influencing their current userbase to ease closer and closer to the the middle

STEROLIZER posted...

I think we should actively campaign to try and get them to swing over. That involves being able to put the shoe on the other foot sotospeak, and try to understand their side of the issue. Thats the dialogue we need, and thats where the nuance lies. Figure out the nuance, and swing them over.

Ok. Tell me the nuance between the side that thinks being trans is a mental illness and not a legitimate gender identity?

lolife67 posted...

Right! We could try actually holding them accountable with a zero tolerance policy but the issue is that Democrats, as a whole, aren't really progressive.

What?

STEROLIZER posted...

I certainly use to believe that. Then Trump took office.

Do you think everyone votes in our elections? Lol

STEROLIZER posted...

It might be on our side. Thats true, but like, Im not really willing to let them take office again in the meantime. It makes sense just to try and appeal to those swing voters and attempt to dent their political power by influencing their current userbase to ease closer and closer to the the middle

Appeal to them in what way? Be exact here.

STEROLIZER posted...

What?

Keep reading instead of cutting off my comment. You might understand.

lolife67 posted...

Ok. Tell me the nuance between the side that thinks being trans is a mental illness and not a legitimate gender identity?

Bro, you gotta choose a different topic. Its not safe for either of us to go in that direction regardless of our intent fandom just released that statement and all.

STEROLIZER posted...

Bro, you gotta choose a different topic. Its not safe for either of us to go in that direction regardless of our intent fandom just released that statement and all.

Dude don't shy away. We've been discussing politics this long so don't punk out now.

lolife67 posted...

Dude don't shy away. We've been discussing politics this long so don't punk out now.

He's friends and associates with some of the MMA world's more outspoken transphobes. He won't be able to speak candidly on this.

TheLiarParadox posted...

He's friends and associates with some of the MMA world's more outspoken transphobes. He won't be able to speak candidly on this.

I mean, he can always PM me if he really wanted to discuss this in good faith. But I know he's just a troll, so...

STEROLIZER posted...

But how do you convince the folks currently sided against it to suddenly make that change and jump over the line?

We ignore them? Just hope the younger generation advancing into voting age gives democracts the numbers necessary to not have to worry about swing voters?

They are welcome to cross over any time they want.

STEROLIZER posted...

Bro, you gotta choose a different topic. Its not safe for either of us to go in that direction regardless of our intent fandom just released that statement and all.

Trans people don't get to "choose a different topic". There are politicians trying to have them murdered here and now.

So how do you reach out to people who are literally advocating for your genocide? Cause that's what trans people have to deal with, while you insist that "both sides" are to blame.

EPR-radar posted...

It's more like

Waiter: "Welcome to our fine dining establishment. We have two options on the menu today: A) basic ham sandwich and B) roast pig shit garnished with arsenic and ground glass. Which do you want?"

Centrist customer: "sweats in indecision".

https://youtu.be/fHjbDSOmeiM?si=_03yoAR7D_-uFaxX

Umbreon posted...

Trans people don't get to "choose a different topic". There are politicians trying to have them murdered here and now.

So how do you reach out to people who are literally advocating for your genocide? Cause that's what trans people have to deal with, while you insist that "both sides" are to blame.

This, but he isn't posting in good faith anyway.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/7a5c0c29.jpg

lolife67 posted...

That's not a question.

See, still nobody will answer what's wrong with pointing out that both sides suck.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

See, still nobody will answer what's wrong with pointing out that both sides suck.

I'll bite.

While no side with without their issues, people online using ""both sides"" are more often than not using it to justify, downplay, equalvlate, or otherwise defend the far right.

Saying, for example, that online leftists being rude is no different than literal neo nazis on the far right advocating for murder only serves to deflect negative attention from the latter.

"Both sides" isn't constructive because one is significantly more dangerous and terrible than the other, and suggesting otherwise is disingenuous.

STEROLIZER posted...

Bro, you gotta choose a different topic. Its not safe for either of us to go in that direction regardless of our intent fandom just released that statement and all.

This translates to: What i want to say is going to get me banned

TheLiarParadox posted...

He's friends and associates with some of the MMA world's more outspoken transphobes. He won't be able to speak candidly on this.

FTR I denounce Jake Shields, and everything he posts on Twitter.

He did use to be one of my mma coaches back in the day, but I dont agree or support anything he says on Twitter whatsoever. Also havent even seen the guy since before covid. He moved out of San Francisco and went to Las Vegas.

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

This translates to: What i want to say is going to get me banned

He asked me to try and defend transphobia from a conservative pov. Im not doing that.

We were discussing being able to put yourselves in other peoples shoes and see things from their PoV so you can better deconstruct their arguments and eventually change their mindset and bring them over to your own PoV.

I still agree with that practice in theory but homie found a surefire example of where I cant actually do that.

Well Done. I concede.

But is that because you realize that transphobia is an inexcusable trait and there's no point trying to emphasize with people practicing it...

Or because you're afraid of getting in trouble for speaking your mind?

Because both are significantly different conclusions.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/0/040d8fcd.jpg

Umbreon posted...

Trans people don't get to "choose a different topic". There are politicians trying to have them murdered here and now.

So how do you reach out to people who are literally advocating for your genocide? Cause that's what trans people have to deal with, while you insist that "both sides" are to blame.

This. I think bigotry should be regarded in the same vein as I do any form of bullying.

Person who starts the fight loses the right to complain when the other one fights back.

And yeah problem with "Both sides" is that such would suggest holding the far left and far right in equal regards, but not saying a word to the latter.

For example, a person loses it because of a bigoted comment, they need to calm down. Yet apparently being called put on bigotry is somehow meriting of losing control.

Umbreon posted...

But is that because you realize that transphobia is an inexcusable trait and there's no point trying to emphasize with people practicing it...

Or because you're afraid of getting in trouble for speaking your mind?

Because both are significantly different conclusions.

I still believe in hearing conservatives out, and then trying to deconstruct their arguments and convert them over to my perspectiveabsolutely.

I definitely think that alot of people who are transphobic wouldnt be if someone would just have a polite and steady dialogue with them.

Its just that for a lot of them, nobody has ever tried. Ive actually been able to do this a couple of times with old friends from high school, teammates at my gyn, and even my mother.

But to try and acknowledge the other sides viewpoints in writing for the purpose of a discussion on GameFaqs then you are technically going to be submitting transphobia. Regardless of intent, and that could be considered offensive. So not going to do that.

@STEROLIZER

I still believe in hearing conservatives out, and then trying to deconstruct their arguments and convert them over to my perspectiveabsolutely.

I definitely think that alot of people who are transphobic wouldnt be if someone would just have a polite and steady dialogue with them.

I mean another point of discussion in society is that parents and people raising/educating children alike are often reminded that you can't always go easy on kids and being their buddy 24/7.

So why should our fellow adults be expected to be able to self-examine their bigotry to realize how wrong they are?

If youth isn't an excuse for ignorance, then fellow adults shouldn't need us to spoon feed them on the error of their ways.

Umbreon posted...

I'll bite.

While no side with without their issues, people online using ""both sides"" are more often than not using it to justify, downplay, equalvlate, or otherwise defend the far right.

Saying, for example, that online leftists being rude is no different than literal neo nazis on the far right advocating for murder only serves to deflect negative attention from the latter.

"Both sides" isn't constructive because one is significantly more dangerous and terrible than the other, and suggesting otherwise is disingenuous.

"Not liberal enough"; shoulda figured.

@RetuenOfDevsman
As I said in addition to Umbreon's take earlier, the problem is that both sides would mean you view both sides of extremism equally except a suspicious lack/little of criticism for the far right.

Shouldn't the far right being getting an earful as well?

Lmao

The perfect golden middle ground where everyone get along if only you speak nicely enough to everyone long enough is a pretty fantasy.

But it's just that.

That isn't to say don't try to reach an understanding, or don't try to resolve issues peacefully. We absolutely should. But the grim reality of life is that some people will not be reasoned with. Some people's hearts have hardened, and attempting to reach out to them is futile.

Nazis for example? History shows us only one thing works with people who choose that ideology.

When someone speaks like them, when someone encourages the genocide of a people, you don't use the kid gloves. You use the bat.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

"Not liberal enough"; shoulda figured.

This is my reward for responding to you seriously.

May everyone else learn from my mistake.

The idea of the US system having two sides is funny already.

You have one side, two versions of it. The bad version, and the ridiculously-straight-up-evil version.

A true centrist is far to the left of the Democratic party.

McMarbles posted...

Yes, weve all seen South Park.

Lmfao thank you

These people are totally delusional

Antiyonder posted...

@RetuenOfDevsman
As I said in addition to Umbreon's take earlier, the problem is that both sides would mean you view both sides of extremism equally except a suspicious lack/little of criticism for the far right.

Shouldn't the far right being getting an earful as well?

Absolutely.

Umbreon posted...

This is my reward for responding to you seriously.

May everyone else learn from my mistake.

You'll learn.