Not "fitting in", even in online MAP spaces

[WandersGlade]

My personality doesn't seem to fit, like I'm at odds with everyone even though I don't try to be.

[BLueRibbon]

Why do you feel like you're at odds with everyone? You don't give that impression here.

[WandersGlade]

I really like your contributions and I'm glad you joined Mu as an "early access" member. I really hope the kinds of discussions we've been having so far can help set the atmosphere for what this place will become.

That's kind of you to say.

Why do you feel like you're at odds with everyone? You don't give that impression here.

I haven't gotten into a serious argument here yet (although I came close to it in the Biden thread). I've had some relatively heated interactions/arguments over the course of the last month, both with anti and pro contact people, quite often on stuff only tangentially related to MAP issues.
I think the clearest example was the thread on AtF I made asking why we shouldn't be allowed to ignore moderators. I think I got a nearly universal negative response to that. Or leading up to that, my argument in the contact debate thread about whether sex positivity requires a person to reject the separation of sexual trauma/abuse from other forms of trauma/abuse. And before that, arguing that from a practical perspective it doesn't matter whether lolicons/shotacons really are MAPs, since from an outside perspective that's how they will be perceived whether they like or not, so if they want to protect their hentai they should have solidarity with those who identify as MAPs. On VoA my comparison of anti-vaxxers/anti-maskers to people who won't accept that being a MAP isn't a choice (i.e. neither group wants to listen to science or be told what to do), and got an aggressive response from one particular user.
I've been way too aggressive in the past, I think, but even when I try to moderate my position and not be provoked I feel the conflict is often very deep. For example on the b4um, my dispute over the Radbruch formula, or on VoA, my thread about whether consent was cognitive.
I seem to be magnetically drawn towards conflict, even though I don't enjoy it.

[BLueRibbon]

You are pushing people to think in ways that are unfamiliar and uncomfortable to them, and they don't like it. I also do this a lot, and it is necessary if you're going to be successful as an MAP activist.

If you continue to do this, you will continue to receive many hateful responses. Look at how my posts on BC are received. You have to learn not to care.

[WandersGlade]

You are pushing people to think in ways that are unfamiliar and uncomfortable to them, and they don't like it. I also do this a lot, and it is necessary if you're going to be successful as an MAP activist.

If you continue to do this, you will continue to receive many hateful responses. Look at how my posts on BC are received. You have to learn not to care.

I'll try to make it clearer in my head whether I'm talking to someone to make friends, or to change their mind. Probably a lot of this problem is not being clear if I'm in a space for social support or to change minds, as it isn't realistic to expect both in the same context.

Just snipping this part because it's the only topic I've read, but I felt that you were having a good discussion where you were raising challenges and they were being met and the participants and observers of the topic alike were able to learn and refine their thinking. I didn't see that topic as confrontational or aggressive at all.

I think you're probably just in a mental space where it's easy to second guess yourself. I get that. But please don't leave. We'll be officially opening soon and we need people like you to set the tone.

I'm aware that thread has gone smoothly so far, however I very nearly slipped into being really passive aggressive. I could feel myself on the edge of getting angry.
I won't leave, don't worry.

[uwuux]

My personality doesn't seem to fit, like I'm at odds with everyone. I don't try to be. I feel like I should step away, not out of fear but because I don't feel "at home", however.

You are a strong personality with strong opinions, maybe even a little bit arrogant, so I believe that this is a normal outcome. Fundamentally, I have the same issue as you, I'm at odds with almost everyone. However, I think it's important to realize that many of those online arguments are a waste of time; don't take them too seriously and when things get heated, it's better to just walk away and drop that discussion, which takes strength and discipline. I've done that many times on VoA, and I still like and even love most members there; I accept them for who they are even though we don't have much in common. When confronted, it's almost impossible to change someones mind. And in the end, we're just animals on the same level, even though we believe that we are right and they are wrong. My personal biggest pet peeve is not even MAP related, but rather that most MAPs seem to be leftists(?). I myself am very, very pro capitalism. The (stupid) stuff we argue about...

Regarding that feeling of never being at home, this is a tricky situation, and there's probably not a straight forward answer. Strangely enough, people nowadays feel more "like themselves" online than in real life, even though they also feel lonelier online. Especially young people, especially men. This might seem like a paradox, but maybe close, intimate connection is not about the intellectual mind, but about the primitive heart. The mind struggles to connect with others, ultimately leading to more doubts and to more fears. In other words, this is a personality trait, with its own set of positives and negatives, and it's inherently not a "problem" where there is a "solution" for.

While that longing for a home - for your people - is still strong, I think we have no other choice than to keep wandering, to keep an eye out and to settle for good enough, or close enough, and not chase this childish concept of "happiness" with that utopian implication of being able to experience peek euphoria, forever. In the end, compromises must be made, and you have to accept people for who they are. Because they have to do the same for you.

[Jim Burton]

There is a common misunderstanding among conservatives that MAP rights is an identity movement following on from cultural leftism on Tumblr, etc in the 2010s.

What I believe has happened, is that certain leftist MAPs have run with that idea themselves.

We are in fact a latent mass movement, and always have been.

[WandersGlade]

You are a strong personality with strong opinions, maybe even a little bit arrogant, so I believe that this is a normal outcome. Fundamentally, I have the same issue as you, I'm at odds with almost everyone. However, I think it's important to realize that many of those online arguments are a waste of time; don't take them too seriously and when things get heated, it's better to just walk away and drop that discussion, which takes strength and discipline. I've done that many times on VoA, and I still like and even love most members there; I accept them for who they are even though we don't have much in common. When confronted, it's almost impossible to change someones mind. And in the end, we're just animals on the same level, even though we believe that we are right and they are wrong.

I think people can change their minds, it's just there's currently a norm that you never have to. People generally don't change unless you trap them with something objective at stake, e.g. like betting a significant amount of money that Biden loses the upcoming election. Also, I think, implicitly, if an argument is to have any worth, it requires both parties to have conditions under which they will change their minds. Nothing productive can happen as long as people are willing to move goal posts.
I don't really mind if people don't want to subject all their beliefs to rigorous testing, some of my closest friends are religious after all. However in the context of arguments/debates, people need to do this.

While that longing for a home - for your people - is still strong, I think we have no other choice than to keep wandering, to keep an eye out and to settle for good enough, or close enough, and not chase this childish concept of "happiness" with that utopian implication of being able to experience peek euphoria, forever. In the end, compromises must be made, and you have to accept people for who they are. Because they have to do the same for you.

I'm not expecting to "experience peek euphoria, forever", just that the way I think and feel isn't so counter-intuitive to people that I have to defend every part of it in order for people to understand it. I find it very hard to believe that the way I think is as unusual as people make it out to be.

[uwuux]

I find it very hard to believe that the way I think is as unusual as people make it out to be.

I understand what you're saying. But my point is rather that if you go into those groups with this sort of mentally, then almost every interaction turns into a confrontation, an endless back and forth, possibly things become hostile. You could argue that given this is a discussion/activism forum, that this behavior is to be expected, since goals must be defined and ideally met one day. However, this inherently changes the environment into a political battle ground, where building a home is next to impossible. You will most likely not feel like you fit in when everyone around you is advocating for their own self-interest and trying to get a piece of the cake for themselves. You can accept this tradeoff, for a greater goal, but this comes at a cost of course.

Additionally, and you will probably disagree with my perspective here, but your description of wanting to change peoples mind implies that you are somehow objectively right and the opposition is somehow objectively wrong, something I hinted on earlier. Unless you're discussing hard sciences (even then), then most political and economic opinions and policies are rarely based on some observable reality or rigorous testing - but rather on relative value systems and ideologies. There are no solutions, only tradeoffs. If you believe we MAPs have it hard to get anything done politically, then you must not have noticed how absolutely desperate and under performing some of those major mainstream parties have become. Many of which have deep pockets and powerful figures. And even those LGBTQ+ lobbies that we like to look up to for inspiration, given their past successes, are famous for being riddles with constant infighting, fracturing and generally nothing to show for. Fundraisers and contributions go to lost causes or the real estate valuations of their owners.

I don't mean to be a doomer, I'm in fact a very optimistic person. But I know which battles are not worth fighting and I cut my losses quickly. What I'm trying to say here is that you can either choose between a political party or a home, but not both. If you find a way around this, then let me know Regardless, no matter what choices you're going to make, I hope you do find your peace one day. And maybe come over to VoA for once in a while again. Just for a peak or so to keep up with us weirdos. If you want to.

[WandersGlade]

I understand what you're saying. But my point is rather that if you go into those groups with this sort of mentally, then almost every interaction turns into a confrontation, an endless back and forth, possibly things become hostile. You could argue that given this is a discussion/activism forum, that this behavior is to be expected, since goals must be defined and ideally met one day. However, this inherently changes the environment into a political battle ground, where building a home is next to impossible. You will most likely not feel like you fit in when everyone around you is advocating for their own self-interest and trying to get a piece of the cake for themselves. You can accept this tradeoff, for a greater goal, but this comes at a cost of course.

Debate doesn't have to be like a fight. You don't know me well enough. I don't get aggressive with people unless they give me the runaround first. If people are polite and honest they can even change my mind sometimes.

Additionally, and you will probably disagree with my perspective here, but your description of wanting to change peoples mind implies that you are somehow objectively right and the opposition is somehow objectively wrong, something I hinted on earlier. Unless you're discussing hard sciences (even then), then most political and economic opinions and policies are rarely based on some observable reality or rigorous testing - but rather on relative value systems and ideologies.

Yes, people's positions can be incoherent. That's a sign people are being dishonest or haven't thought through what they're saying. You can and should challenge people on their values. You don't have to believe in objective morality to do that (but it helps).

There are no solutions, only tradeoffs. If you believe we MAPs have it hard to get anything done politically, then you must not have noticed how absolutely desperate and under performing some of those major mainstream parties have become. Many of which have deep pockets and powerful figures. And even those LGBTQ+ lobbies that we like to look up to for inspiration, given their past successes, are famous for being riddles with constant infighting, fracturing and generally nothing to show for. Fundraisers and contributions go to lost causes or the real estate valuations of their owners.

Yes, because if there are no right answers, you try to please everyone and end up pleasing no one. Alternatively, you challenge people on their ill-founded beliefs and build a consensus by continuously striving towards universality.

I don't mean to be a doomer, I'm in fact a very optimistic person. But I know which battles are not worth fighting and I cut my losses quickly. What I'm trying to say here is that you can either choose between a political party or a home, but not both. If you find a way around this, then let me know Regardless, no matter what choices you're going to make, I hope you do find your peace one day. And maybe come over to VoA for once in a while again. Just for a peak or so to keep up with us weirdos. If you want to.

I believe fighting to make people accountable the most important battle, otherwise we're all doomed anyway. There are many people I feel comfortable around that I disagree with, it's just that they are rarely all in the same place.
I don't think I'll be going back to VoA very often, other than either out of a moral obligation (e.g. sharing the risk assessment) or further research. The culture there isn't a good fit for me.