Lumping in would be saying “all people who defend trans folx have a tendency to defend all trans folx” (even if there is a specific perhaps indefensible individual some people are wanting to “defend” on the mere basis that they are trans) such as you may be doing in this thread [Edit: surely that must part of my misinterpretation fas I initially took the tone of your reply saying how “being trans is not relevant to this person’s behavior” as being in some way in defense of the controversial mystery person’s behavior or online presence, which is not actually what was happening perhaps, and maybe I was too wrapped up in some kind of perverse radicalization narrative that I thought might have been happening as sometimes does with some of those cult followings that can sometimes be widely online, and often exchange with people in bad faith to thrive off of continuations of controversy ]
I saw no EXPLICIT “lumping in”, by either you or chippy in the comments above. they chose to include that descriptor maybe as a subtle way to associate this Chan person with other transitioned people, but I don’t think “lumping in” is the exact words I would think to use in such a statement of (biased, but not universalizing) selection of descriptors
an example how Chippy could have been EXPLICITLY “lumping in” would be if he had just included a word like “another” (xyzfghpqrs [insert negatively stigmatized descriptor here] + trans person) to show that he feels the traits are typically aligned (lumped)
I’m coming at this from the perspective that all stigmas are rooted in fear, short-sighted self-interest, or attachment to a particularly limited scope of ontology used in one’s view of the world or themselves which cannot accept new aspects of the reality they exist in. So imo stigmatizing for example racist people (hardest to defend so good example) does nothing to defeat racism because they are being proven right (that such an issue is worth fighting over) when one tries fighting a person over their racism. It’s like any phobia: exposure therapy can work but shame often pushes people further from owning their own thoughts and behaviors and into safer frameworks or circles where less effort is needed to survive such an ontological (I hope I’m using this word correctly I just learned what it means last week…) restructuring of their sense of self/values/meaning in their mortal life.
and lastly, if you are the one inserting the word “another” to the statement in your own head, then maybe the best place to start working on transphobia would be to ask why you felt the need to insert that slight tweak to the statement, and how such a subversion of someone else’s verbiage might have served your ego or confirmed your worldview in some way, and perhaps why that could be what has happened
This is some JP-level philbro bullshit I had never thought I would see on Lemmy. 5 people fell for it though so congrats. Also very nice of you to share some of your more simplistic ideas right here.
“It’s just a joke bro” type of shit. Do the attack helicopter one too, quick, while everyone is laughing 🤡
I just realized that there might be a deeper meaning to the attack helicopter/ velociraptor jokes which I had not been picking up on before in that those are aggressive combatant type things which attack often in groups. Damn… ok considering that, I can see where the undertone came from on those examples and I honestly never even thought about how they might be seen or interpreted by a traumatized or otherwise sensitive or proactively inclusive listener as trying to undercut/discount the impact/validity of someone else’s internal experience, on the basis that such a person is presenting as combative, aggressive, or even hunting/conquering in some way. I had only ever read those as people choosing arbitrary, perhaps humorously obscure, examples of creatures or I guess machines that are not typically associated with how one experiences their sense of self, and that such a concept was seeming difficult to get used to in the mind of the person making those types of “jokes” (expressions) which is why they chose examples that would be even harder to get used to (for a wider group of people) to illicit some type of sympathetic response in the (presumably) typical person hearing the rhetoric
you’re not wrong lol. are you for or against the “/s” construct anyways because in my opinion, it feels like a shitty thing to even dare to do, considering how covert narcissism is basically founded on that type of humor of gaslighting some of the people they are interacting with into thinking that they have thought about some type of feeling (deep, personal, vulnerable, challenging, or dissenting) on a deeper level and are just using “ironic” statements to try and remain relevant to the issue/topic without doing the internal work of even processing the questions posed by the original statements which might seem puzzling to readers/listeners upon first impressions, but if one could take enough careful time to think them through or piece them together, might be able to come up with actually much more meaningful takeaways from even simpler statements, pieces of art, or expressions more generally.
I don’t disagree with you, I think basically all humor is in bad taste, but comes from a true intention to express some kind of emotion, as limited in its complexity or rarity as may it be. I generally try to epitomize misconceptions in ways that allow for genuine constructive pushback, to test what I am doing wrong because I often times find that what sometimes I expect to be common decency or typical behavior has been proven to be inaccurate to what my predictions might have been. At various points seeing other people treating others in their life in minimizing ways that I had been able to observe in some limited way, but also sometimes beginning to notice ways that people have perhaps at times been doing some of those manipulative strategies with me, either intentionally or unintentionally. And also sometimes through reflection upon times when it had taken me sometimes weeks to months after an interaction to put together the context or way to interpreting my actions or an expression of thoughts/feelings of general unease or uncertainty about life, the world, or perhaps some underlying unease with the social interaction with another (often seemingly due to lack of perfect socialization on my part) I will realize that many of those times I will have at some point in the exchange acted or spoken out of ignorance in that person’s perspective, and they just did not have the patience to teach me in that moment. so I am interested in improving my ability to be understood on an increasingly precise or “nuanced” level as I learn to both hear and validate the perspectives of others while still being able to use their own language with them to be able to mitigate conflicts of interest while not coming across as intentionally provoking disgust in others through disrespecting of cultural taboos in the various forms they can come in.
Maybe I should still look up who JP is though.
Also I hadn’t heard the term “philbro” or “dementophobia” before today, so I can’t say I regret trying to engage with these discussions, despite me probably inflicting a lot of psychic damage on perhaps you or other individuals who have the misfortune of trying to make any sense of what I am putting down.
Ok idgaf about AI or any LLM, but I’m happy that you like it
again I cannot disagree and I do genuinely think that and hear that all the time, so I am inclined to wonder what point do you have to share with me regarding that aspect of my ability to communicate. Any concrete suggestions or are you just spiteful for some other reason? constructive criticism (aside from “say less” :/ )?
I don’t know how to help you (or myself) if you think an AI could write this shittily about topics, not seem to be able to arrive at a point that means anything to anyone else less than a quarter of the time, and engage with low hanging fruit of bait like the crap that chippy or you are posting.
if you have experience arguing with chat bots, I’d not criticize you for your efforts but I might even ask for your guidance or advice depending on your level of competency demonstrated but also on my present level of urgency with dealing with such an entity (since foresight in these types of social interactions is not my strong suit and planning ahead for obscure/difficult/emotionally-involved conversations has especially definitely never been a strong suit for me even with close friends or family in my life)
part of it I think is definitely related to my general struggles with what I think I have heard some people call “object permanence” but not only with physical objects for me it can happen when considering changes in my environment involving the moods or mindsets of people in my life, things that they have been going through that I might have never experienced so it is hard for me to relate to them over, but sometimes though it takes an additional effort to foster the requisite openmindedness needed to try and imagine something I have never experienced, and I often times am only able to hold those feelings for a short time before I need to let them sink within and become dormant for a time, as I think that I am sometimes capable of something akin to the more idealized notions of what some might describe as empathy, in short bursts. But accepting and embodying the perspective that I may perhaps have some limited but nonzero effect of control/influence over everything that happens to me or anyone in my life is something that I often hold copious amounts of reservations over. The so-called locus of control issue that many people struggle with, which sometimes seems to ebb and flow depending of the utilization or continued exploration of one’s agency in their lives (interactions, social settings) where they may be able to vouch for or care for themselves or others in some way that proves some capacity for influence or control to a person who might be perhaps living their life according to preconceived notions or on the script of another person’s framework
Lumping in would be saying “all people who defend trans folx have a tendency to defend all trans folx” (even if there is a specific perhaps indefensible individual some people are wanting to “defend” on the mere basis that they are trans) such as you may be doing in this thread [Edit: surely that must part of my misinterpretation fas I initially took the tone of your reply saying how “being trans is not relevant to this person’s behavior” as being in some way in defense of the controversial mystery person’s behavior or online presence, which is not actually what was happening perhaps, and maybe I was too wrapped up in some kind of perverse radicalization narrative that I thought might have been happening as sometimes does with some of those cult followings that can sometimes be widely online, and often exchange with people in bad faith to thrive off of continuations of controversy ]
I saw no EXPLICIT “lumping in”, by either you or chippy in the comments above. they chose to include that descriptor maybe as a subtle way to associate this Chan person with other transitioned people, but I don’t think “lumping in” is the exact words I would think to use in such a statement of (biased, but not universalizing) selection of descriptors
an example how Chippy could have been EXPLICITLY “lumping in” would be if he had just included a word like “another” (xyzfghpqrs [insert negatively stigmatized descriptor here] + trans person) to show that he feels the traits are typically aligned (lumped)
I’m coming at this from the perspective that all stigmas are rooted in fear, short-sighted self-interest, or attachment to a particularly limited scope of ontology used in one’s view of the world or themselves which cannot accept new aspects of the reality they exist in. So imo stigmatizing for example racist people (hardest to defend so good example) does nothing to defeat racism because they are being proven right (that such an issue is worth fighting over) when one tries fighting a person over their racism. It’s like any phobia: exposure therapy can work but shame often pushes people further from owning their own thoughts and behaviors and into safer frameworks or circles where less effort is needed to survive such an ontological (I hope I’m using this word correctly I just learned what it means last week…) restructuring of their sense of self/values/meaning in their mortal life.
and lastly, if you are the one inserting the word “another” to the statement in your own head, then maybe the best place to start working on transphobia would be to ask why you felt the need to insert that slight tweak to the statement, and how such a subversion of someone else’s verbiage might have served your ego or confirmed your worldview in some way, and perhaps why that could be what has happened
This is some JP-level philbro bullshit I had never thought I would see on Lemmy. 5 people fell for it though so congrats. Also very nice of you to share some of your more simplistic ideas right here.
“It’s just a joke bro” type of shit. Do the attack helicopter one too, quick, while everyone is laughing 🤡
I just realized that there might be a deeper meaning to the attack helicopter/ velociraptor jokes which I had not been picking up on before in that those are aggressive combatant type things which attack often in groups. Damn… ok considering that, I can see where the undertone came from on those examples and I honestly never even thought about how they might be seen or interpreted by a traumatized or otherwise sensitive or proactively inclusive listener as trying to undercut/discount the impact/validity of someone else’s internal experience, on the basis that such a person is presenting as combative, aggressive, or even hunting/conquering in some way. I had only ever read those as people choosing arbitrary, perhaps humorously obscure, examples of creatures or I guess machines that are not typically associated with how one experiences their sense of self, and that such a concept was seeming difficult to get used to in the mind of the person making those types of “jokes” (expressions) which is why they chose examples that would be even harder to get used to (for a wider group of people) to illicit some type of sympathetic response in the (presumably) typical person hearing the rhetoric
you’re not wrong lol. are you for or against the “/s” construct anyways because in my opinion, it feels like a shitty thing to even dare to do, considering how covert narcissism is basically founded on that type of humor of gaslighting some of the people they are interacting with into thinking that they have thought about some type of feeling (deep, personal, vulnerable, challenging, or dissenting) on a deeper level and are just using “ironic” statements to try and remain relevant to the issue/topic without doing the internal work of even processing the questions posed by the original statements which might seem puzzling to readers/listeners upon first impressions, but if one could take enough careful time to think them through or piece them together, might be able to come up with actually much more meaningful takeaways from even simpler statements, pieces of art, or expressions more generally.
I don’t disagree with you, I think basically all humor is in bad taste, but comes from a true intention to express some kind of emotion, as limited in its complexity or rarity as may it be. I generally try to epitomize misconceptions in ways that allow for genuine constructive pushback, to test what I am doing wrong because I often times find that what sometimes I expect to be common decency or typical behavior has been proven to be inaccurate to what my predictions might have been. At various points seeing other people treating others in their life in minimizing ways that I had been able to observe in some limited way, but also sometimes beginning to notice ways that people have perhaps at times been doing some of those manipulative strategies with me, either intentionally or unintentionally. And also sometimes through reflection upon times when it had taken me sometimes weeks to months after an interaction to put together the context or way to interpreting my actions or an expression of thoughts/feelings of general unease or uncertainty about life, the world, or perhaps some underlying unease with the social interaction with another (often seemingly due to lack of perfect socialization on my part) I will realize that many of those times I will have at some point in the exchange acted or spoken out of ignorance in that person’s perspective, and they just did not have the patience to teach me in that moment. so I am interested in improving my ability to be understood on an increasingly precise or “nuanced” level as I learn to both hear and validate the perspectives of others while still being able to use their own language with them to be able to mitigate conflicts of interest while not coming across as intentionally provoking disgust in others through disrespecting of cultural taboos in the various forms they can come in.
Maybe I should still look up who JP is though.
Also I hadn’t heard the term “philbro” or “dementophobia” before today, so I can’t say I regret trying to engage with these discussions, despite me probably inflicting a lot of psychic damage on perhaps you or other individuals who have the misfortune of trying to make any sense of what I am putting down.
Lotta words to explain how you’re DEFINITELY not transphobic 😒
They gave a thoughtful and well written response to you that was not transphobic in the slightest.
Maybe it’s time for you to log off and live in the real world for a moment.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Reading is good for the mind, feeling is good for the soul, thinking is good for the gut, while drinking is good for the heart.
You ever hear the phrase “if I had more time I’d have written a shorter letter”?
AI could have written a more thought out reply lmao (edit: assuming it’s not… I mean look at it.)
Ok idgaf about AI or any LLM, but I’m happy that you like it
again I cannot disagree and I do genuinely think that and hear that all the time, so I am inclined to wonder what point do you have to share with me regarding that aspect of my ability to communicate. Any concrete suggestions or are you just spiteful for some other reason? constructive criticism (aside from “say less” :/ )?
I don’t know how to help you (or myself) if you think an AI could write this shittily about topics, not seem to be able to arrive at a point that means anything to anyone else less than a quarter of the time, and engage with low hanging fruit of bait like the crap that chippy or you are posting. if you have experience arguing with chat bots, I’d not criticize you for your efforts but I might even ask for your guidance or advice depending on your level of competency demonstrated but also on my present level of urgency with dealing with such an entity (since foresight in these types of social interactions is not my strong suit and planning ahead for obscure/difficult/emotionally-involved conversations has especially definitely never been a strong suit for me even with close friends or family in my life)
part of it I think is definitely related to my general struggles with what I think I have heard some people call “object permanence” but not only with physical objects for me it can happen when considering changes in my environment involving the moods or mindsets of people in my life, things that they have been going through that I might have never experienced so it is hard for me to relate to them over, but sometimes though it takes an additional effort to foster the requisite openmindedness needed to try and imagine something I have never experienced, and I often times am only able to hold those feelings for a short time before I need to let them sink within and become dormant for a time, as I think that I am sometimes capable of something akin to the more idealized notions of what some might describe as empathy, in short bursts. But accepting and embodying the perspective that I may perhaps have some limited but nonzero effect of control/influence over everything that happens to me or anyone in my life is something that I often hold copious amounts of reservations over. The so-called locus of control issue that many people struggle with, which sometimes seems to ebb and flow depending of the utilization or continued exploration of one’s agency in their lives (interactions, social settings) where they may be able to vouch for or care for themselves or others in some way that proves some capacity for influence or control to a person who might be perhaps living their life according to preconceived notions or on the script of another person’s framework
Least inauthentic conservative ^