MAP Forum

uwuux wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 6:19 pm 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.

WandersGlade wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 9:10 am 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.

uwuux wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 9:41 pm 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.

WandersGlade wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2024 12:35 pm My personality doesn't seem to fit, like I'm at odds with everyone even though I don't try to be.

I have a nonconformist relationship with society. Although I have never been diagnosed with Asbergers or Autism for example, I have always sensed being a square peg in a round hole. The root cause for this has everything to do with my primary sexuality, its notoriety, and social exclusion.

Negative school experiences caused me to feel guilt from a young age - a perception of ‘gayness directed towards the younger boys’, angered my peers. Little has changed into adulthood. I have a lot of love to give, but no mechanism or opportunity to give it. Essentially placed in a box with a label on the inside saying ‘your sexuality has lost you all your freedoms’, and a label on the outside saying ‘radioactive, do not touch’. For part of my life this metaphorical box became reality.

Societal exclusion resulting from my nonconformity has meant I instinctively reject dominant narratives plus the media proxies that propagandise them. Some examples: I lost a number of “friends” due to my early stance alerting them to the perils of taking the jab during 2021 and 2022; I continue to lose acquaintances due to my pro-Russia pro-BRICS stance from 2022 to the present day; loss of family has been the biggest casualty, simply because I am not prepared to denounce my innate sexuality for the sake of appeasement.

‘Not "fitting in", even in online MAP spaces.’ Finding narrowly-defined kindred spirits online is difficult because anonymity severely limits one’s ability to really get to know others. This problem did not exist so much before the internet, not least because now, most “subversive” speech online can be monitored by agencies that wish you harm. Historically, in Europe, conferences were held every so often allowing individuals to meet up and consider how best to move the cause forward via activism. In my experience, friendship and trust could more easily be established in this way.

Strato wrote: ↑Wed Jul 31, 2024 2:32 pm Societal exclusion resulting from my nonconformity has meant I instinctively reject dominant narratives plus the media proxies that propagandise them. Some examples: I lost a number of “friends” due to my early stance alerting them to the perils of taking the jab during 2021 and 2022; I continue to lose acquaintances due to my pro-Russia pro-BRICS stance from 2022 to the present day; loss of family has been the biggest casualty, simply because I am not prepared to denounce my innate sexuality for the sake of appeasement.

Do you think that acting on instinct might make you irrational at times? Like nonconformity for nonconformity's sake?

PorcelainLark wrote: ↑Sat Aug 03, 2024 3:58 pm

Strato wrote: ↑Wed Jul 31, 2024 2:32 pm Societal exclusion resulting from my nonconformity has meant I instinctively reject dominant narratives plus the media proxies that propagandise them. Some examples: I lost a number of “friends” due to my early stance alerting them to the perils of taking the jab during 2021 and 2022; I continue to lose acquaintances due to my pro-Russia pro-BRICS stance from 2022 to the present day; loss of family has been the biggest casualty, simply because I am not prepared to denounce my innate sexuality for the sake of appeasement.

Do you think that acting on instinct might make you irrational at times? Like nonconformity for nonconformity's sake?

I have a problem with dominant narratives. I research and analyse the validity of narratives that bother me, restrict my freedoms, or have the potential to harm me, such as the cases I mention above. My gut instinct to mistrust - born out of harmful discrimination on the basis of my sexuality from a young age - has proven correct over time.

I continue to be astonished at just how many people are willing to accept at face value what they are fed daily by mainstream media. I have learnt just how pernicious a dominant narrative can be in removing the willingness or the ability of everyday people to even debate the topic in question, and instead to take offence at someone prepared to vocalise the opposing view.

Strato wrote: ↑Sat Aug 03, 2024 10:10 pm My gut instinct to mistrust - born out of harmful discrimination on the basis of my sexuality from a young age - has proven correct over time.

Do you think you've ever been wrong? Or that the mainstream has ever been right about anything?

PorcelainLark wrote: ↑Sat Aug 03, 2024 10:52 pm

Strato wrote: ↑Sat Aug 03, 2024 10:10 pm My gut instinct to mistrust - born out of harmful discrimination on the basis of my sexuality from a young age - has proven correct over time.

Do you think you've ever been wrong? Or that the mainstream has ever been right about anything?

Yes, I told my beloved that it would rain today - I was wrong. On the other hand, the papers said it would be dry - it turned out they were correct.

Strato wrote: ↑Sat Aug 03, 2024 11:44 pm Yes, I told my beloved that it would rain today - I was wrong. On the other hand, the papers said it would be dry - it turned out they were correct.

But it's never the case about anything major, right?